Ivan Oransky Retraction Watch Talk at #AAAS2020

1. Ivan Oransky, MD
Co-Founder, Retraction Watch
Distinguished Writer In Residence, NYU (Journalism)
Vice President, Editorial, Medscape
@ivanoransky
@retractionwatch
Why We Should Be Talking About Reproducibility --
But Not Forget about Fraud
AAAS2020
February 15, 2020

2. A 1987 View
“Having acknowledged that, we must recognize that 99.9999
percent of reports are accurate and truthful, often in rapidly
advancing frontiers where data are hard to collect. There is no
evidence that the small number of cases that have surfaced
require a fundamental change in procedures that have
produced so much good science. To continue the great advances
that are being made, we must accept that perfect behavior is a
desirable but unattainable goal. Vigilance? Yes. Timidity? NO.”
Daniel Koshland, editor of Science, 1987
https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/Fraud_in_Science_1987.pdf

3. The Price Tag For Denial, 2019

4. Why We Launched Retraction Watch
August 3, 2010

5. The Retraction Watch Database
retractiondatabase.org

6. Retractions By The Numbers
Year # of Retractions # of Papers Published %
2000 38 1MM .004
2008 367 1.2MM .031
2010 4863 1.4MM .347*
2014 868 1.6MM .054
2016 1418 1.8MM .078
retractiondatabase.org

7. Leveling Off?
Science, October 26, 2018

8. Why Are Papers Retracted?
Science, October 26, 2018

9. Common Reasons for Retractions
• Duplication (“self-plagiarism”)
• Plagiarism
• Image Manipulation
• Faked Data
• Fake Peer Reviews
• Publisher Error
• Authorship Issues
• Legal Reasons
• Not Reproducible

10. Why Does It Take So Long?

11. Are We Catching Them All?
Allison et al Nature 2016 http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-a-tragedy-of-errors-1.19264

12. Is Misconduct on the Rise?
“Overall, 3.8% of published papers contained
problematic figures, with at least half exhibiting
features suggestive of deliberate manipulation. The
prevalence of papers with problematic images has
risen markedly during the past decade.”

13. http://nautil.us

14. What Happens to Retracted Papers’
Citations?
-Assn of College & Research Libraries 2011

15. What Happens to Retracted Papers’ Citations?
-Assn of College & Research Libraries 2011
Of 391 citations analyzed, only 6%
acknowledge the retraction.

16. Do Journals Get the Word Out?
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication,
January 8, 2018

17. Do Journals Get the Word Out?
Of the 812 records for retracted
publications, 40.0% (n=325) did not
indicate that the paper had been
retracted.
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication,
January 8, 2018

18. Post-Publication Peer Review On The Rise

19. “PubPeer was created specifically to bypass the
suffocating and restricted channels of ‘correspondence
to the editors’ and journal commenting. The tens of
thousands of useful comments that users have posted
on PubPeer were previously suppressed by that system,
yet facilitated by an open framework encouraging
factual discussion. We’re not going back.”
-- Brandon Stell, co-founder, PubPeer
Post-Publication Peer Review On The Rise

20. The Role of The Sleuths
Nick Brown and James Heathers
Elisabeth Bik

21. A 2017 View
“Indeed there is always the possibility that those
who would harm science would punish us for
ferreting out our own weaknesses and
correcting them. If so, shame on them.”
-- Marcia McNutt, Chronicle of Higher Education, April 20, 2017
https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/letters/scientists-dont-view-reproducibility-as-risky-business/

22. Contact Info/Acknowledgements
ivan@retractionwatch.com
http://retractionwatch.com
@retractionwatch
Thanks:
The MacArthur Foundation
The Arnold Foundation
The Helmsley Trust
Individual donors