Earlier this week, the John Maddox Prize was awarded in a lovely ceremony in the Wellcome Collection in London. The Maddox Prize “recognises the work of individuals who promote science and evidence, advancing the public discussion around difficult topics despite challenges or hostility.”
From the Sense About Science website: “The prize is a joint initiative of Sense about Science and the science journal Nature. The late Sir John Maddox, FRS, was editor of Nature for 22 years and a founding trustee of Sense about Science. His daughter Bronwen Maddox is the patron of the prize. The Maddox Prize is funded by the work of the organisations concerned and by public donations.”
Continue reading “John Maddox Prize 2019”
A quick post about some news articles that came out yesterday that report about the set of 200 papers from Annamalai University that I wrote about earlier here and here.
Update: One of the photo collages on Burak’s exhibit was taken from Leonid Schneider’s website For Better Science, i.e. this post reporting on a misconduct investigation of papers by Karin Dahlman-Wright. The artist has acknowledged Leonid’s work at the exhibition.
This is really cool. Burak Korkmaz, who works in communication design and infographics, attended me to his exhibit at the Bio26 Biennial of Design in Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Burak’s exhibit is called “Scientific Misconduct: Who cures cancer in photoshop?”
Continue reading “Scientific Misconduct exhibit at Bio26 Biennial of Design”
In the past months I have been going through my spreadsheet with over 2,000 papers with image or other problems. Many of these papers were reported by me in 2014 and 2015 to the editors of the journals in which they were published. Now, around 5 years later, it is time to see what happened with my reports.
In this post, I want to show you an example of a paper that I reported in 2014, and that was corrected about a year later.
In my opinion, the Editors of the journal made a huge mistake here. This should have been a retraction.
Continue reading “Mega-corrections and weak editors”
A quick post about a story I have been reading this morning. The Wisconsin State Journal reported last week about a graduate student who committed suicide after spending seven years working for an abusive Engineering professor at UW-Madison.
The article does not mention scientific misconduct, but it gives a glimpse behind the scenes of the toxic environments that some principal investigators (PIs) create. Something that is very much related to science misconduct, because extreme pressure by a professor might be one of the reasons that scientific studies might include fabricated or falsified data.
Continue reading “A sad story about a toxic lab”
Several readers have asked about plagiarism detection. So in today’s post I will talk about the tools I have been using, and some other tools that are available.
Continue reading “Plagiarism detection tools”