retraction
TagRussian Philosophy Journal Retracts Article Because of Law Banning “LGBT Propaganda”
Retraction Watch reports: “A Russian philosophy journal has retracted a paper about lesbian fashion magazines, citing a newly passed law that bans ‘propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations and (or) preferences.'” (more…)
Logic Journal Retracts Two Articles After Refutation in Online Discussion
Studia Logica: An International Journal for Symbolic Logic, recently published and then retracted two articles by Janusz Czelakowski (Opole) following a discussion at MathOverflow, a site for professional mathematicians. (more…)
Peter J. Schulz Plagiarizes Again—And Is Caught By Philosophy Prof.’s Class (updated)
Peter J. Schulz, who has a PhD in philosophy from Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt (Germany) and is currently employed as Professor of Communication in the Faculty of Communication Sciences at the University of Lugano, and who already had four plagiarism-related retractions (and three citation-related errata) to his name, was again found to have plagiariz..
The Default: Rebuttals Not Retractions (several updates)
Over the past several days academics on social media have been discussing in increasingly agitated language the publication of “The Case for Colonialism,” by Portland State University associate professor of political science Bruce Gilley, in the academic journal, Third World Quarterly. (more…)
Disability Studies Quarterly Is Reviewing Stubblefield’s Articles
A philosophy professor who wishes to remain anonymous wrote to the editor of Disability Studies Quarterly in the wake Anna Stubblefield’s conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a severely disabled man requesting that the journal issue a retraction of an article purportedly co-authored by Stubblefield and her victim. From that letter:
Earlier this month, phi..
Refutation Watch
Retraction Watch is profiled in today’s Chronicle of Higher Education (currently paywalled). The site keeps track of retractions in scientific research, with an emphasis on retractions owed to scientific misconduct.
Its founders, a pair of veteran science writers, were not just interested in big-ticket fraud cases; they were determined to apply scrutiny to scient..