I think that Retraction Watch needs to do an institution leaderboard, to highlight which are the most, & least, corrupt institutions, because corruption’s a cultural thing, not merely an individual-thing.
Wouldn’t that end up with a big survivorship bias? The truly corrupt would have no retractions from authors or institutions and there are potential incentives for publishers to not retract.
There are plenty of retraction worthy papers still standing. I think most in academia have come to the realisation that as of the late 2010s and early 2020s the ratio of decent paper to slop has gotten so bad that most bad papers are just ignored, not retracted.
I think that Retraction Watch needs to do an institution leaderboard, to highlight which are the most, & least, corrupt institutions, because corruption’s a cultural thing, not merely an individual-thing.
_ /\ _
Wouldn’t that end up with a big survivorship bias? The truly corrupt would have no retractions from authors or institutions and there are potential incentives for publishers to not retract.
Exactly.
There are plenty of retraction worthy papers still standing. I think most in academia have come to the realisation that as of the late 2010s and early 2020s the ratio of decent paper to slop has gotten so bad that most bad papers are just ignored, not retracted.