As many readers know, we’ve been hard at work curating a comprehensive database of retractions, and are now up to more than 16,000 entries. Despite that large number — as much as triple what you’ll find in commonly used databases — we know there are notices we’re missing. We’re doing our best to fill in […]
Category Archives: RW announcements
One journal broke a retractions record by pulling more than 100 papers in one day for faked reviews, a Harvard graduate student obtained a restraining order against his boss after being forced to undergo a psychiatric exam, and a well-known food scientist at Cornell faced heavy criticism about his research. And that’s just some of […]
The post The 2017 Retraction Watch Year in Review (hint: Our database is nearly done) appeared first on Retraction Watch.
It’s time for the “Best of 2017” lists to start appearing — so why not do one for retractions? We think it’s a good idea, so have partnered with The Scientist for the last few years to compile our most notable notices of the year. From new records to mass resignations, you can check out […]
We know there are a lot of causes that matter to you, but since you’re reading this, we may be one of them. So we’d like to ask for your support. On this Giving Tuesday, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to The Center For Scientific Integrity, the 501(c)3 parent organization of Retraction Watch. Any […]
The post On Giving Tuesday, consider supporting the work of Retraction Watch appeared first on Retraction Watch.
A commonly used questionnaire designed to predict how well patients will stick to their drug regimen is stirring up some controversy in the publishing world. Over the last decade, the creator of the copyrighted questionnaire — public health specialist Donald Morisky of the University of California, Los Angeles — has aggressively pursued any researcher who uses […]
The post Pay to play: Scientists are bristling over the cost of a common research tool appeared first on Retraction Watch.
CHICAGO — As many Retraction Watch readers may know, the Peer Review Congress happens every four years — much like the Olympics. For three days here on the shores of Lake Michigan, researchers will present findings on subjects from bias to data sharing to misconduct. Our Ivan Oransky is there, and will be tweeting, so […]
The post The Olympics of research into scientific publishing is happening now. Follow along here. appeared first on Retraction Watch.
A recent pre-print showed that scientists in China can earn up to $165,000 to publish a paper in a top journal, but that’s not the only place where researchers can get some extra cash. Recently, we conducted an informal search for other institutions around the world that offer cash prizes for publishing research — and […]
August 3rd is a big day around here — it’s our birthday. Today, we celebrate seven years since two science journalists decided, not exactly on whim but close to it, to launch a blog about retractions. Little did they know. (To hear our co-founder Ivan Oransky talk more about this milestone, check out his podcast […]
The post Happy birthday to Retraction Watch! (We’re 7.) And an update on our database. appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Regular Retraction Watch readers may recall a remarkable story from January involving Harvard’s Lee Rubin and one of his graduate students. As we reported in Science at the time, the graduate student, Gustavo German, said he had been subjected to a forced psychiatric evaluation as “an act of revenge by Rubin, retaliation prompted by German’s […]
The post The Harvard lab head, the grad student, and the restraining order: An ongoing saga appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Did you miss some of this week’s posts? Here they all are, in one handy roundup: Are there foxes in Tasmania? Follow the poop Lancet retracts (and replaces) paper a year after authors report error that changes “all numbers” Lost in translation: Authors blame a language error for wrong diagnosis More notices appear for embattled […]
The post The RW week in review: Doing the right thing, two journals’ first retractions appeared first on Retraction Watch.