Women don’t peer review papers as often as men, even taking into account the skewed sex ratio in science – but why? In a new Comment in today’s Nature, Jory Lerback at the University of Utah and Brooks Hanson at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) confirmed the same trend in AGU journals, which they argue … Continue reading Why don’t women peer review as often as men? Fewer invites and RSVPs, researchers say
Researchers in China have retracted two 2016 papers about the possible use of a cholesterol-lowering agent to treat bleeding on the brain. One of the retracted papers in the Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS) had multiple problems that were “too extensive to revise,” according to the lengthy retraction notice, relating to issues with authorship, data analyses, … Continue reading Authors retract two statin papers, one with problems “too extensive to revise”
It’s been another exciting year for us at Retraction Watch. As always, there has been more to cover than we have time for. At the same time, we’ve expanded our efforts in other media, telling bigger stories and offering more analysis. And we’ve made major progress on our database — more on that in a … Continue reading The Retraction Watch 2016 year in review — and a sneak peek at our database
“Retractions are part and parcel of academic and scientific publication. Court ordered retractions are not.” So ends a judge’s September 30, 2016 opinion dismissing a case brought in 2014 by Andrew Mallon, a former Brown University postdoc, alleging that his advisor and former business partner, John Marshall, had published a paper in 2013 in PLOS Biology that should … Continue reading Judge tosses case, saying that court-ordered retractions are not part of scientific publication
This week at Retraction Watch featured some big numbers: How a request to correct a single paper turned into 19 retractions, and 18 tips for giving horrible presentations. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Circumcision is a hot topic. So hot, questions about a reviewer’s potential conflict with the author of an article promoting circumcision prompted a journal editor to resign, and one academic to call another a “fanatic.” It began in August, when Brian Morris, professor emeritus of molecular medicine at the University of Sydney, published a critique … Continue reading Journal editor resigns over firestorm from circumcision article
A publisher in the Netherlands has retracted 13 published studies and withdrawn 52 that were under consideration (but not yet published) after learning that someone illegally accessed its workflows to add fake authors and manipulate text. According to Seyyed Mohammad Miri, the founder, CEO, and managing director of Kowsar Publishing, the 13 retracted papers all included extra authors … Continue reading Scientific publisher hacked, affecting 65 papers
Earlier this month, BioMed Central and Springer announced that they were retracting nearly 60 papers for a host of related issues, including manipulating the peer-review process. Recently, we were contacted by one of the reviewers who was impersonated by some of the authors of the retracted papers. The scientist wants to remain anonymous, but provided … Continue reading How fake peer review happens: An impersonated reviewer speaks
The week at Retraction Watch featured 58 retractions in one fell swoop, and a look at what you should do if you find out a paper you’ve cited has been retracted. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Two journals sharing the same title — allegedly due to an “academic divorce” between the founders — are giving two different accounts to why a paper may (or may not) have been retracted. Confused yet? We are. Here’s what we can piece together. The journal Amphibian and Reptile Conservation once had two editors, Craig Hassapakis and Robert Browne; … Continue reading Two journals, same name: Did one editor retract the other’s paper?