"Compromised science" news/opines (includes retractions, declining academic standards, pred-J, etc)

Journal won’t retract paper that involved human organ transplants in China
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...at-involved-human-organ-transplants-in-china/

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation (JHLT) has decided against retracting a November 2024 paper that violated the ethics policy of the publication...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Journal that published viral study on black plastic removed from major index
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...dy-on-black-plastic-removed-from-major-index/

Chemosphere, the Elsevier title which in September published an article on “unexpected exposure to toxic flame retardants in household items” such as black plastic cooking utensils, has been removed from Clarivate’s Web of Science index in its December update...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Researcher linked to paper mill activity mysteriously reappeared on list of journal’s editorial board
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...appeared-on-list-of-journals-editorial-board/

An engineer accused of being involved in paper mill activities mysteriously reappeared on a list of editorial board members at Springer Nature’s Scientific Reports earlier this year...
_
 
A couple of years ago, Nature put out a resource collection for the "de-westernization" of science: Decolonizing science toolkit.

Since humanities scholars are the ultimate source of both sub-movements (decolonization of knowledge), it seems only fitting to cross-highlight the parallel initiative taking place in philosophy itself:

Decolonising Philosophy Curriculum Toolkit
https://www.soas.ac.uk/decolonising-philosophy-curriculum-toolkit

The Decolonising Philosophy Toolkit (DPT) is a concise guide to decolonising philosophy curricula. [...] The purpose of this decolonial toolkit is to embrace marginalised thought -- certainly to not just challenge the hegemony of western philosophy, but also to enable rich and transformative conversations between intellectual systems...
_
 
Japanese researchers surprised to learn they co-authored papers with North Korean scientists
https://www.science.org/content/art...ey-co-authored-papers-north-korean-scientists

Journalists have revealed that nine scientists in Japan co-authored journal articles with North Korean researchers in recent years, possibly violating U.N. sanctions that bar scientific cooperation with the isolated country. But those apparent joint efforts, on eight papers, came as a surprise to both the Japanese scientists and their institutions...

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Might also help to identify the research papers that are applesauce.

Can AI-generated podcasts boost science engagement?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03960-8

INTRO: “My brain starts to die when I try to read a journal article,” says Jessica Sacher, a microbiologist at Stanford University in California. Papers are written to be technically comprehensive rather than understandable, she says. “I just want someone to tell me what the gist is.”

Now, artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots can help to turn difficult concepts into clear, engaging podcasts, providing a simpler method for keeping up with the literature. Now, Sacher regularly absorbs the latest research by tuning in to AI-made conversations.

A flurry of AI podcasts has emerged (see ‘AI podcast tools’). Some tools require minimal input from the user. Others come equipped with customizable features, such as the option to change the voices or languages of the ‘hosts’... (MORE - details)
_
 
Last edited:
‘Destigmatise efforts to uphold research integrity’
https://www.researchprofessionalnew...gmatise-efforts-to-uphold-research-integrity/

INTRO: Any number of things can undermine the robustness and reliability of research, only one of which is intentional misconduct. While the research process attempts to be more reliable than other forms of generating knowledge, the simple truth is that it is still conducted by humans, who inevitably sometimes make mistakes.

Getting rid of the stigmas that surround the discovery and correction of errors by acknowledging that mistakes happen is therefore a vital part of improving the quality and integrity of research.

That’s why, in a discussion paper published this month, the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) argues that research misconduct investigations should, as far as possible, use neutral language...... (MORE - details)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Shoddy commentaries—a quick and dirty route to higher impact numbers—are on the rise
https://www.science.org/content/art...nd-dirty-route-higher-impact-numbers-are-rise

EXCERPT: Science and Retraction Watch’s investigation suggests authors, journals, and institutions all benefit from the scheme, which floods the literature with poor-quality publications and casts doubt on metrics of scholarly output and impact. For authors, commentaries can be a quick and easy way to amass publications and citations. Authors “just want a PubMed-indexed article. That’s it,” says Shirish Rao, a recent medical graduate who works at a hospital in Mumbai, India.

Commentaries are an ideal avenue because “you don’t really need original data,” so AI tools can generate them in almost no time, explains Rao, who is a member of the Association for Socially Applicable Research, a nonprofit think tank. And because they are rarely peer reviewed, they are typically easier to get into journals than a research paper. Publishing these pieces can be good business for journals, too. For one, many charge publication fees for commentaries... (MORE - details)
_
 
Unscientific social science is trading under false pretences
https://www.timeshighereducation.co...-social-science-trading-under-false-pretences

EXCERPTS: ... social science has been a contentious issue throughout my 50-plus years of being a “social scientist”. [...] Whether social research is scientific is not a simple question ... Nevertheless, I suggest that there is much work by social scientists that trades falsely under the label.

There are multiple reasons. One is external pressure to produce large numbers of research publications in conditions that lack the resources necessary to do this while sustaining quality. A second is that there are practical or political commitments on the part of researchers that encourage bias – or at least exaggeration of the likely validity of what are viewed as positive findings...

[...] There are also social scientists who believe that the very claim to scientific knowledge is ethically or politically unacceptable because they view it as “epistemic domination” that supports the socio-political status quo. [...] If, in these contexts, they were to announce that their sole aim was to spread their own political opinions, they would probably get little financial support.

There are also researchers who present their work as literature or art, with the concept of social science expanded to incorporate this. But is this legitimate? [...] if social scientists do not work hard to check that their conclusions are true, and do not limit themselves to what can be justified on that basis, they too are in the fake news business... (MORE - details)
_
 
Louisiana bars health dept. from promoting flu, COVID, mpox vaccines? Report
https://arstechnica.com/health/2024...rom-promoting-flu-covid-mpox-vaccines-report/

INTRO: Louisiana's health department has been barred from advertising or promoting vaccines for flu, COVID-19, and mpox, according to reporting by NPR, KFF Health News, and New Orleans Public Radio WWNO.

Their investigative report—based on interviews with multiple health department employees who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation—revealed that employees were told of the startling policy change in meetings in October and November and that the policy would be implemented quietly and not put into writing.

Ars Technica has contacted the health department for comment and will update this post with any new information... (MORE - details)
_
 
Evolution journal editors resign en masse to protest Elsevier changes
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...asse-to-protest-elsevier-changes/#more-130593

All but one member of the editorial board of the Journal of Human Evolution (JHE), an Elsevier title, have resigned, saying the “sustained actions of Elsevier are fundamentally incompatible with the ethos of the journal and preclude maintaining the quality and integrity fundamental to JHE’s success.”

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

A look back at 2024 at Retraction Watch, and forward to 2025
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12/26/a-look-back-at-2024-at-retraction-watch-and-forward-to-2025/

If 2024 felt like a whirlwind, you’re not alone. It was another busy one here at Retraction Watch, too. Some numbers to tell that story...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Finland Publication Forum will downgrade hundreds of Frontiers and MDPI journals
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...rade-hundreds-of-frontiers-and-mdpi-journals/

A committee of scholars in Finland has decided to downgrade 271 journals from Frontiers and MDPI in their quality rating system, in a move that may discourage researchers from submitting manuscripts to the outlets. Both publishers criticized the move, first reported in Times Higher Education, as lacking transparency and seeming to target fully open-access publishers...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Journals investigating dozens of papers by leading Canadian urologists
https://retractionwatch.com/2024/12...ens-of-papers-by-leading-canadian-urologists/

A high-profile Canadian urologist received an editorial expression of concern for one of his papers this month, after anonymous comments on PubPeer flagged suspected data duplication in dozens of his articles...
_
 
As George Bernard Shaw once put it: "Thus you may see that when a [...freethinker....] throws off all the bonds of convention, and stands free from all allegiance to established religion, law, order, patriotism, and learning, he promptly uses his freedom to put on a headier set of [ideological] chains."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

What is a woman? My discussion on a Freedom From Religion Foundation website
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024...ussion-on-the-freedom-from-religions-website/

EXCERPTS (Jerry Coyne): So here’s the story. I’m not only a member and supporter of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, but am also on its Honorary Board. Thus I was doubly distressed when I saw the post below on their website Freethought Now!, a post that completely ignores the widely-accepted biological definition of a woman—one based on the possession of a reproductive apparatus evolved to produce large immobile gametes—in favor of a definition based on self-identification.

[...] Recently-confected and ideological definitions of “woman” not only offend me as a biologist, but they have nothing to do with the mission of the FFRF. So I asked if I could make these points in a response...

[...] in the comments section below my piece, I am accused of all manner of perfidy. Yes, some people agree with what I said, but it’s amazing that a piece on the biological definition of “woman” can elicit stuff like this... (MORE - details)
_
 
Followup to the item in the prior post.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The FFRF removed my piece on the biological definition of “woman” (Jerry Coyne)
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024...-piece-on-the-biological-definition-of-woman/

EXCERPTS: Several things are clear, including a point I’ve made before: the FFRF has a remarkable ability to place any kind of antiwoke ideology under the rubric of “Christian nationalism.” That’s why I wrote in my now-expunged piece, “As a liberal atheist, I am about as far from Christian nationalism as one can get!” And of course I support LGBTQIA+ rights, save in those few cases where those rights conflict with the rights of other groups, as in sports participation...

[...] But it’s the last six paragraphs of the FFRF’s post where they explain why they took down my piece. It is because it caused “distress” and “did not reflect [the FFRF’s] values or principles.” ... Does the FFRF think that sex is really a spectrum, that there are more than two sexes in humans, or that the most useful definition of biological sex doesn’t involve gamete size? I don’t know, nor do they say.

I’m distressed that it’s come to this, as I’ve always been a big supporter of the FFRF and its historical mission [...] But when they start censoring my words because, though biologically justifiable, they are ideologically unpalatable, that is just too much....

[...] How sad it is that one of the nation’s premier organizations promoting “freethought” won’t permit that kind of thought on their website, but instead quashes what they see as “wrongthink.” (MORE - details)
_
 
Both Hawaii and India pop up as locations for QU.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Quantum University misuses physics to train fake doctors
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/m...university-misuses-physics-train-fake-doctors

EXCERPT: Quantum University is not a university. Instead, it is described as an online “institution of higher learning,” which its catalog states is “not accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Secretary of Education.” It thus borrows the word “university” in the loosest way possible. Its diplomas appear to be pretty much worthless, so why bother acquiring them? Because a diploma can impress, especially in careers that don’t require a grounding in science, like aromatherapist or homeopath.

And the desire to impress is key to Quantum University’s marketing strategy. Its catalog makes the point clear over and over again, bordering on satire. “Earning a PhD degree allows you to use the title ‘Dr.’,” it reads. It “confirms you as an authority” and qualifies you “to become certified by many respected and prestigious professional associations, organizations, and certification boards.” The words “respect,” “prestige,” and “recognition” are impossible to miss in the document... (MORE - details)

List of unaccredited institutes of higher learning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unaccredited_institutions_of_higher_education
_
 
‘Precocious’ early-career scientists with high citation counts proliferate
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-04006-9

Researchers have questions about how so many authors have racked up a large number of citations so quickly, although some of those authors are honest overachievers...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Recent encounters with atom-thin salami slicing
https://reeserichardson.blog/2024/12/30/recent-encounters-with-atom-thin-salami-slicing/

“Salami slicing” is the practice of taking a set of research findings and splitting them up into as many publishable papers as possible. It is typically regarded as a tactic to inflate the authors’ CVs. [...] Here, I’ve compiled several examples across different fields of what could variously be described as salami slicing, reduction to the Least Publishable Unit, redundant publication, data re-use or just plain fraud. I’ll call it what I see: data stretched to such an extreme that it becomes translucent...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

(paper) Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study
https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2024/12/24/bmjebm-2024-113083

CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify evidence of gender bias during the editorial decision-making process for papers sent out to peer review. However, the under-representation in manuscripts accepted for publication of first authors affiliated to Asia, Africa or South America and those affiliated to upper/lower-middle and low country-income group, indicates poor representation of global scientists’ opinion and supports growing demands for improving equity, diversity and inclusion in biomedical research. The more diverse the countries and incomes of the first and last authors, the greater the chances of the publication being accepted...
_
 
Why we are still arguing about the health effects of moderate drinking?
https://reason.com/2025/01/08/why-w...bout-the-health-effects-of-moderate-drinking/

The evidence is vast but open to interpretation because [...] the inherent limitations of observational studies that rely on self-reports of alcohol consumption and do not account for all the factors that may increase or reduce disease rates. It is not surprising that people continue to argue about the risks and benefits of moderate drinking...
_
 
The 14 universities with publication metrics researchers say are too good to be true
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/01/10/bibliometrics-universities-publication-metrics-authorship/

More than a dozen universities have used “questionable authorship practices” to inflate their publication metrics, authors of a new study say. One university even saw an increase in published articles of nearly 1,500% in the last four years...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Science paper by Toronto lab retracted
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/01/09/science-retraction-toronto-orthwein-durocher/

A 2014 paper in Science by a lab in Toronto has been retracted after a December expression of concern raised “potential data integrity issues.” The paper, “Mitosis Inhibits DNA Double-Strand Break Repair to Guard Against Telomere Fusions,” is from the lab of Daniel Durocher, a professor of molecular genetics at the University of Toronto...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Biotech company agrees to pay $4 million to settle data falsification allegations
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/01...ra-settlement-data-falsification-allegations/

A biotech company whose CEO faced allegations of manipulating data in papers used in NIH grant applications will pay a settlement of $4 million to resolve those allegations, the Department of Justice announced January 6. The settlement is the latest installment in a series of allegations...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Elsevier denies AI use in response to evolution journal board resignations
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/01...onse-to-evolution-journal-board-resignations/

The publisher of the Journal of Human Evolution says it does not use artificial intelligence in its production process, contrary to a statement issued last month by the journal’s editorial board when all but one member of the group resigned...
_
 
‘WithdrarXiv’ database of 14,000 retracted preprints launches
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00011-8

INTRO: Researchers have launched a database of more than 14,000 studies that have been withdrawn from the preprint server arXiv since its launch in 1991. As well as shedding light on why those preprints were pulled from arXiv, the data set — called WithdrarXiv — aims to spur the creation of automated tools that flag potential errors to researchers hoping to submit manuscripts, says Delip Rao, a computer scientist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and a co-author of a study describing the tool. Most preprints have not been through formal peer-review or quality-assurance processes... (MORE - details)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Journal retracts Thermo Fisher Scientific study after ethical concerns
https://cen.acs.org/policy/publishing/Journal-retracts-Thermo-Fisher-Scientific/103/web/2025/01

EXCERPTS: An academic journal has retracted a study conducted by researchers with the science services giant Thermo Fisher Scientific over concerns that a tool used in the study violates the ethical standards of forensic genetics. [...] Among ... concerns with the study is that it used a forensic DNA database that may be used by Chinese police to identify individuals who are not part of the database. Such databases have “been deployed on a large scale, often without much regard to safeguards for rights of people who might be caught in DNA investigations,” he says... (MORE - details)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

An extra pair of eyes: adopting innovative approaches to detect integrity issues in Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00210-024-03697-1

ABSTRACT: Scientific integrity has been increasingly challenged by scientific misconduct and paper mills, resulting in an increase in retractions. Naunyn–Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology has been significantly impacted by fraudulent submissions, resulting in numerous retractions. By analyzing retraction notes and utilizing a post-publication surveillance strategy, this editorial discusses how this journal continues to deal with problematic publications, uncovers image- and physiological-related integrity issues, and responds to fraudulent activity. By adopting innovative methods to detect integrity issues and transparently communicating our concerns, we aim to increase awareness among scientists and scientific journals. (MORE - details)
_
 
Please don't cite this editorial
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818025000017

INTRO: Hearsay has no place in the courtroom. But science, it seems, often tolerates looser standards than the witness stand. In this issue of the Journal of Clinical Anesthesia, one of us (ADC) has laid a trap of sorts for scholars.

His alarmingly titled letter to the editor, “Spinal Cord Ischemia After ESP Block,” in fact reports zero such cases of this life-threatening complication as was written at the start of the letter, to avoid unnecessary alarm: “I would like to assure you and the readers: this letter does not report any cases of spinal cord ischemia following an erector spinae plane block. In fact, as far as I am aware, there have been no such reported cases to date.”

Why write about a problem that does not appear to exist? As De Cassai explains, he wanted to perform an experiment and “have a little fun at the intersection of academic curiosity and citation behavior.” He wonders: “Will this fictional complication make its way into the literature simply because of an enticing title?”

De Cassai is not the first to tread this ground – nor the first to demonstrate the unfortunate state of citationship... (MORE - details)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

How is content generated by ChatGPT infiltrating scientific papers published in premier journals?
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1650

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to highlight the situation whereby content generated by the large language model ChatGPT is appearing in peer-reviewed papers in journals by recognized publishers. The paper demonstrates how to identify sections that indicate that a text fragment was generated, that is, entirely created, by ChatGPT. To prepare an illustrative compilation of papers that appear in journals indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases and possessing Impact Factor and CiteScore indicators, the SPAR4SLR method was used, which is mainly applied in systematic literature reviews.

Three main findings are presented: in highly regarded premier journals, articles appear that bear the hallmarks of the content generated by AI large language models, whose use was not declared by the authors (1); many of these identified papers are already receiving citations from other scientific works, also placed in journals found in scientific databases (2); and, most of the identified papers belong to the disciplines of medicine and computer science, but there are also articles that belong to disciplines such as environmental science, engineering, sociology, education, economics and management (3). This paper aims to continue and add to the recently initiated discussion on the use of large language models like ChatGPT in the creation of scholarly works. (MORE - details)
_
 
Scientists don’t want to get scooped—and it’s hurting science
https://insight.kellogg.northwester...t-want-to-get-scooped-and-its-hurting-science

EXCERPTS: What motivates a scientist to make discoveries? An intrinsic desire to expand human knowledge, of course. But there’s often another force at work: the desire to be first...

[...] “Academic careers are built on reputation,” says Ryan Hill, a Kellogg assistant professor of strategy who studies the incentives that drive scientific innovation. “If I want credit that I can turn into salary from a university, I need people to recognize that I made novel discoveries.” Being the first to publish a finding is a major way for scientists to establish this recognition.

Still, little is known about the effects that these “priority races” have on scientists’ careers—and on the quality of the science itself. To find out, Hill and Carolyn Stein of the University of California, Berkeley investigated this topic within the field of structural biology... (MORE - details)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tackling review of ‘uninformative’ studies, SACHRP joins Quest to boost research caliber
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/tackling-review-of-uninformative-7368414/

EXCERPT: HHS Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP) has waded into the fray, issuing its own set of recommendations on what it calls “foreseeably uninformative” research, crafted to raise awareness and provide assistance to institutional review boards (IRBs) so that they can “resist” approving such studies, in the words of former SACHRP chair Stephen Rosenfeld.

“Poor design, lack of methodologic/statistical expertise, the under-appreciated impact of resource limitations, and simple wishful thinking may lead to uninformative research projects that are foreseeably unlikely to meet their goals, waste time and resources, and devalue the contributions of research subjects,” according to the recommendations SACHRP approved at its October meeting... (MORE - details)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

90% of scientific research is crap
https://medianwatch.netlify.app/post/sturgeon/

INTRO: Reading Adrian Edmondson’s excellent autobiography, he mentioned Sturgeon’s law which is: “Ninety percent of everything is crap”. Adrian is a comedian and was applying the law to his creative work. Sturgeon was using it talk about science fiction, but I think it also applies to scientific research, and Sturgeon’s number is strikingly similar to the estimate from Chalmers and Glasziou that 87.5% of health and medical research is wasted (which they rounded down to 85%).

Labeling 90% of research as “crap” is hyperbolic and unfair as there are layers to the crap. At the pit is the research that is fraudulent. The cream of the crap includes studies that did not go to plan, but where the researchers still learnt something, even if that was only how to do the next study better. This research still has value, even though it failed to answer its target question.

In the middle there’s a lot of stuff where the researchers made an avoidable error, including tackling an already answered question, a simple mistake in their design or analysis, or simply failing to publish their work... (MORE - details)
_
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top