Retraction Watch

Retraction Watch is a blog that focuses on the retraction of scientific studies and other related issues. It was established in August 2010 by science journalists Ivan Oransky, who is the Vice President of Editorial at Medscape, and Adam Marcus, the editor for Gastroenterology & Endoscopy News. The blog is managed by the Center for Scientific Integrity.

International

English

Blog, Newsletter (Digital)

Outlet metrics

Domain Authority

Ranking

Global

#106882

United States

#78561

Science and Education/Biology

#164

Traffic sources

Monthly visitors

Articles

Editors won’t retract talc and cancer article J&J says is false in court

1 week ago | retractionwatch.com | Ellie Kincaid

A journal will not retract a paper linking use of talc-based baby powder to cancer, despite legal pressure from the pharmaceutical giant that made the product. A lawyer representing a unit of Johnson & Johnson in May asked editors of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine to retract a paper on cases of mesothelioma associated with cosmetic talc, following the court-ordered release of the identities of the people described in the article.
Springer Nature psycholinguistics journal retracts over a dozen articles for authorship, peer review issues

1 week ago | retractionwatch.com | Sara Hashemi

A journal has retracted 16 papers after a whistleblower flagged it for “irregularities” in peer review, among other concerns. The Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, a Springer Nature title, published the papers between 2021 and 2024. The articles covered research ranging from studies of the work of Haruki Murakami and Kazakh literature to English reading fluency and the teaching competence of parents of children with cochlear implants.
When PubMed got it right, Elsevier got it wrong, and Retraction Watch helped clear it up

1 week ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

More than 20 years after publishing a letter saying a set of papers should be retracted — and PubMed marking them as such — the journal has finally retracted the articles, following a Retraction Watch inquiry. Let’s back up. In 1998, the journal Contraception published a supplement with six articles on Implanon, a subdermal contraceptive implant. The papers examined the implant’s pharmacodynamics and side effects.
Apparent NCI director candidate wants ‘open, respectful’ post-publication peer review while promoting anonymous site that calls sleuths a ‘mob’

2 weeks ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

Brown University physician-scientist Wafik El-Deiry has been a longtime critic of the post-publication forum PubPeer, where 75 of his papers have been flagged.
10 years after the downfall of a same-sex marriage canvassing study, tenure, some better practices - and an engagement

3 weeks ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

“Gay Advocates Can Shift Same-Sex Marriage Views,” read the New York Times headline. “Doorstep visits change attitudes on gay marriage,” declared the Los Angeles Times. “Cure Homophobia With This One Weird Trick!” Slate spouted. Driving those headlines was a December 2014 study in Science, by Michael J. LaCour, then a Ph.D. student at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Donald Green, a professor at Columbia University.
Fourth retraction for Italian scientist comes 11 years after sleuths flagged paper

3 weeks ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

PLOS One has retracted a 2011 paper first flagged for image issues 11 years ago. The retraction marks the fourth for the paper’s lead author, Gabriella Marfè of the University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli,” in Caserta, Italy. “Involvement of FOXO Transcription Factors, TRAIL-FasL/Fas, and Sirtuin Proteins Family in Canine Coronavirus Type II-Induced Apoptosis,” has been cited 41 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science.
Paper on “wokeness” and mental health retracted for political reasons, authors say

4 weeks ago | retractionwatch.com | Ellie Kincaid

The authors of an article linking scores on a “wokeness” scale and mental health issues are blaming political bias for the retraction of their paper in March following post-publication peer review. The article, “Do Conservatives Really Have an Advantage in Mental Health? An Examination of Measurement Invariance,” appeared in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology last August. It has been cited twice, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science, one being the retraction notice.
IQ study retracted in fallout from decades-old misconduct report

1 month ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

The authors of a paper on how motivation influences intelligence test scores have retracted their paper following the retraction of a 50-year-old study included in their analysis. Part meta-analysis and part longitudinal study, “Role of test motivation in intelligence testing” appeared in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2011.
‘More of the same’: Journals, trade website refuse to correct critiques of book on Alzheimer’s fraud

1 month ago | retractionwatch.com | Ellie Kincaid

Investigative journalist Charles Piller’s latest book, Doctored: Fraud, Arrogance, and Tragedy in the Quest to Cure Alzheimer’s, came out in February. It details the work of Matthew Schrag, a neurologist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and other sleuths who uncovered evidence of problems in hundreds of research papers about the neurologic condition. Most reviews and coverage have been positive, Piller said.
Genentech authors flip PNAS study from corrected to retracted following Retraction Watch coverage

1 month ago | retractionwatch.com | Kate Travis

The authors of a 2006 paper have retracted their article following an extensive correction in January – and a Retraction Watch story noting the correction missed at least one additional issue with the work. “Death-receptor activation halts clathrin-dependent endocytosis,” published in July 2006 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has been cited 99 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science. Most of the authors were affiliated with the biotech company Genentech.