Category Archives: daniele fanelli
The retraction process needs work. Is there a better way?
Posted by daniele fanelli
inWhy do researchers commit misconduct? A new preprint offers some clues
“Why Do Scientists Fabricate And Falsify Data?” That’s the start of the title of a new preprint posted on bioRxiv this week by researchers whose names Retraction Watch readers will likely find familiar. Daniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, Ferric Fang (a member of the board of directors of our parent non-profit organization), Arturo Casadevall, and Elisabeth […]
The post Why do researchers commit misconduct? A new preprint offers some clues appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Posted by daniele fanelli, studies about retractions
inWhat does “reproducibility” mean? New paper seeks to standardize the lexicon
What is the difference between “reproducible” and “replicable”? And how does each relate to results that are “generalizable” and “robust”? Researchers are using these terms interchangeably, creating confusion over what exactly is needed to confirm a scientific result, argues a new paper published today in Science Translational Medicine. Here’s how the US National Science Foundation (NSF) […]
The post What does “reproducibility” mean? New paper seeks to standardize the lexicon appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Posted by AAAS, daniele fanelli, not reproducible, science translational medicine, united states
inResearchers’ productivity hasn’t increased in a century, study suggests
Are individual scientists now more productive early in their careers than 100 years ago? No, according to a large analysis of publication records released by PLOS ONE today. Despite concerns of rising “salami slicing” in research papers in line with the “publish or perish” philosophy of academic publishing, the study found that individual early career researchers’ productivity has […]
The post Researchers’ productivity hasn’t increased in a century, study suggests appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Pressure to publish not to blame for misconduct, says new study
A new study suggests that much of what we think about misconduct — including the idea that it is linked to the unrelenting pressure on scientists to publish high-profile papers — is incorrect. In a new paper out today in PLOS ONE [see update at end of post], Daniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, and Vincent Larivière performed a retrospective analysis of […]
The post Pressure to publish not to blame for misconduct, says new study appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Posted by arturo casadevall, daniele fanelli, ferric fang, studies about retractions
inDanish high court clears Pedersen in misconduct case
Lawyers one, scientists nil. Danish judges have overruled scientists in that nation, concluding that a panel of experts erred in finding that physiologist Bente Klarlund Pedersen, of the University of Copenhagen, was guilty of misconduct. Last September, Pedersen announced that she would fight the ruling of the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD, Danish acronym […]
The post Danish high court clears Pedersen in misconduct case appeared first on Retraction Watch.