Retraction Watch - Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

[Neil Abramson <nabramso@sfu.ca>]

Peter Mansbridge reported on the National last night that up to 50% of scientific journal articles are fraudulent including being based on data sets that turn out not to exist. There is a snowballing of retractions even by top journals.

Next time my paper is rejected at a top journal in favour of something really stellar, I will wonder if the odds are 50/50 my competitor cheated. 

It's really an indictment of our profession. 

And as a reviewer, what can I do? I see the article but not the data set. Even if the solution was to send the data set and I had the time to look st it, how would I know it wasn't computer generated?

Neil Abramson
Beedie

http://retractionwatch.com/


Sent from my iPhone