Studies are retracted all the time. It’s a good thing.
Right, but if you read the article, it’s happening more often now
It says publishing overall is up, but I’m happy to hear of retractions going up with it. I like the idea it proposes about “bug” bounties. That would drive even more retractions
I don’t know, I should probably read the article.
Edit: oh, so that’s why
Actual edit: it would have been nice if they had mentioned per capita retractions. Without knowing whether retractions and publications are keeping pace with one another, you can’t really draw conclusions or comparisons.
Accidental bullshit:
Over the last two decades, even as the overall number of studies published has risen dramatically, the rate of retraction has actually eclipsed the rate of publication.
They mean the rate of change, not the absolute rates (a great deal more than 5,000 papers were published last year).)
Anyways, it’s a big issue and retractions are far too rare, and far too slow. The move towards universities acting more like private corporations is a big part of it. This is a good read: The natural selection of bad science
Probably because they are bullshit and written by that pillow douche so he can make claims that aren’t true simple because they are 'in a study’s? Just a guess.
More likely because researchers, professors, and even grad students are desperate to publish because their jobs require it in the new research-for-profit model of universities and colleges, so they work too quickly and take shortcuts to make their publishing quotas and deadlines.