Last year the journal Nature reported an alarming increase in the number of retractions of scientific papers — a tenfold rise in the previous decade, to more than 300 a year across the scientific literature.
Other studies have suggested that most of these retractions resulted from honest errors. But a deeper a n a lysis of retractions, being published this week, challenges that comforting assumption.
In the new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two scientists and a medical communications consultant a n a lyzed 2,047 retracted papers in the biomedical and life sciences. They found that misconduct was the reason for three-quarters of the retractions for which they could determine the cause.
more
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/s...acted-scientific-papers.html?_r=1&ref=science
Retraction Watch
Other studies have suggested that most of these retractions resulted from honest errors. But a deeper a n a lysis of retractions, being published this week, challenges that comforting assumption.
In the new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two scientists and a medical communications consultant a n a lyzed 2,047 retracted papers in the biomedical and life sciences. They found that misconduct was the reason for three-quarters of the retractions for which they could determine the cause.
more
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/s...acted-scientific-papers.html?_r=1&ref=science
Retraction Watch
