







Scientific sleuths come in from the cold
Research integrity investigators are starting to organize, but the field, and the people, remain idiosyncratic
Research ethics: 3 ways to blow the whistle
Reporting suspicions of scientific fraud is rarely easy, but some paths are more effective than others.

So maybe now we can agree that having an unchecked research integrity militia who unfortunately has the ear of the press and increasingly that of the the publishers, but who fiercely rejects any… | Ioana A. Cristea
So maybe now we can agree that having an unchecked research integrity militia who unfortunately has the ear of the press and increasingly that of the the publishers, but who fiercely rejects any minimal ethics or code of conduct, is a (growing) problem? Also, that 1. problems have to be investigated before deciding they are are legitimate and serious; 2. this investigation is not social media, blogs and the press; 3. this investigation should not be on the front page of journals and Retraction Watch; 4. there are degrees of seriousness and some things can just be corrected or are simply not very consequential (no, it's not a house of bricks where we have to check every brick, that's a dumb analogy), so being absolutely hysterical and overdramatic about any lie, inaccuracy or mistake is purposeful at worse and should be ignored at best and 5. it is not only unnecessary, but harmful, to also go into other, non-academic things the person did or does to complete "investigations" that you (press, sleuth, blogger, etc) do not have the tools and information to do completely and accurately (this fixation would be called harassment in the before times). Others will justly write about what the institutions did or did not do, but what I want to say is that we really should end it with the blank credit we give to any and all allegations that come from the establish research integrity truth fighters.
Fraudulent citations, blamed on AI hallucinations, are becoming more common in research papers
“Fabricated” citations that do not reference real academic papers are spreading in the literature, polluting the public record of science, a new study found


Fabricated citations: an audit across 2·5 million biomedical papers
Scientific literature depends on the integrity of its references. Each reference implicitly asserts that a verifiable source exists and supports the claims being made. When references point to non-existent studies, readers, reviewers, and policy makers are unable to evaluate the evidence.

Fabricated citations: an audit across 2·5 million biomedical papers
Scientific literature depends on the integrity of its references. Each reference implicitly asserts that a verifiable source exists and supports the claims being made. When references point to non-existent studies, readers, reviewers, and policy makers are unable to evaluate the evidence.

Hey ChatGPT, write me a fictional paper: these LLMs are willing to commit academic fraud
Mainstream chatbots presented varying levels of resistance to deliberate requests for fabrication, study finds

Verification Handbook | DataJournalism.com
This book equips journalists with the knowledge to investigate on disinformation and media manipulation.

“Paging Dr. Fraud”: The Fake Publishers That Are Ruining Science
For years, spurious journals have proliferated online, promising academic credibility in exchange for cash.

Investigation finds ‘egregious misconduct’ by CUNY scientist
In a report shared with Science in October 2023, a committee investigating allegations of misconduct by Dr. Hoau-Yan Wang, a professor at the City College of New York (CCNY, which falls under the C…

I have many questions about this. What if the sleuth finds nothing, embarks on a project that leads to nothing? How will the validation happen? What happened to old terms like research integrity? And finally, should we perhaps reflect a bit (I would say even worry) about the incentive being set up?
Retraction Watch
We're thrilled to announce the creation of the Retraction Watch Sleuth in Residence Program.
New study finds that when people help collect data or contribute to research it can build public trust by making scientists feel personally familiar and approachable, and that trust then spreads to how local and tangible the research feels. jcom.sissa.it/article/pubid/JCOM_2506_2026_…
How can citizen science reduce psychological distance to science? Insights from three projects in contested environmental contexts
jcom.sissa.itResearch fraud is often seen as a rare event, but evidence from self-report surveys indicates that fabrication and falsification of data are common enough to be a problem. This study assessed attit...