PubPeer and Self-Correction of Science: Male-Led Publications More Prone to Retraction

This article has a dual objective. Firstly, it aims to investigate whether gender diversity in publications reviewed on Pubpeer has an impact on the (non)retraction of those publications. Secondly, it seeks to analyze the reasons for retractions and examine if there are disparities in retractions based on male-female collaborations. To achieve this, the study utilized a sample of 93,563 publications discussed on Pubpeer spanning the period from 2012 to 2021. The findings reveal that among the reviewed publications, 5% (4,513) were retracted. The concentration index and regression results indicate that publications authored solely by men or led by male authors are 20% to 29% more likely to be retracted compared to those authored solely by women. Regarding the reasons for retractions, the results show that regardless of gender, authors, when working alone, are more prone to engaging in activities such as fake peer review or plagiarism. Women are more concentrated in image manipulation and data errors, while men are more involved in article duplication. Furthermore, the results demonstrate an inverse relationship between the number of authors and retractions, suggesting that a higher number of authors may facilitate better publication control and reduce the temptation for misconduct

Reynald Sécher, Vendée. Du Géno­­cide au mémoricide. Méca­­nique d’un crime légal

Ce fort volume, très bien illus­­tré, reprend au moment où les débats poli­­tiques se sai­­sissent encore une fois de la reconnais­­sance des géno­­cides et de leur ins­­crip­­tion dans la loi, les thèses défen­­dues par R. Sécher depuis 1985. Plu­­sieurs nova­­tions méritent cepen­­dant d’être sou­­li­­gnées. Le livre est pré­­facé par G.-W. Goldnadel, qui se pré­­sente comme pré­­sident d’Avo­­cats sans fron­­tières, et dont on connaît les inter­­ven­­tions en faveur d’Israël mais aussi les..

La perception d’un « désajustement » dans sa situation de travail : les enseignements d’une revue de littérature sur les risques psychosociaux

Suite à une recension de la littérature en sociologie faite pour le Collège d’expertise sur les risques psychosociaux, nous avons relevé un certain nombre de situations de « désajustement ». Des formes d’organisation, des évolutions du travail apparemment mineures, ou des réorganisations, entraînent chez les salariés un sentiment de déséquilibre dans la situation de travail qui peut être pénible à vivre. Cet article plaide pour que ces situations de travail produisant des « décalages » ne soient pas vues de trop haut, ni par les organisateurs du travail, ni par ceux qui l’étudient. Même si ces désajustements sont difficiles à capter dans une enquête statistique, il pourrait être envisagé de tenter de le faire, au moins partiellement.Following a review of the literature in sociology made for the College of expertise on psychosocial risks, we have identified a number of situations of “disadjustment”. Certain forms of organization, work changes that seem minor, or reorganizations can lead employees to experience a feeling of imbalance in their work situation that can become painful to live. This article argues that these work situations should be taken into account both by those who actually organize work and by those who study it. Even if capturing these “disadjustments” is uneasy in a statistical survey, researchers could contemplate to try to so, at least partly

Academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming: a reassessment

The motivation for this Special Issue is increasing concern not only with academic misconduct but also with less easily defined forms of misrepresentation and gaming. In an era of intense emphasis on measuring academic performance, there has been a proliferation of scandals, questionable behaviors and devious stratagems involving not just individuals but also organizations, including universities, editors and reviewers, journal publishers, and conference organizers. This introduction first reviews the literature on the prevalence of academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming (MMG). The core of the article is organized around a life-cycle model of the production and dissemination of research results. We synthesize the findings in the MMG literature at the level of the investigator or research team, emphasizing that misbehavior extends well beyond fabrication and falsification to include behaviors designed to exaggerate or to mislead readers as to the significance of research findings. MMG is next explored in the post-research review, publication, and post-publication realms. Moving from the individual researcher to the organizational level, we examine how MMG can be engaged in by either journals or organizations employing or funding the researchers. The changing institutional environment including the growth of research assessment exercises, increased quantitative output measurement and greater pressure to publish may all encourage MMG. In the final section, we summarize the main conclusions and offer suggestions both on how we might best address the problems and on topics for future research

The new watchdogs’ vision of science: A roundtable with Ivan Oransky (<i>Retraction Watch</i>) and Brandon Stell (<i>PubPeer</i>)

On March 3rd, 2016, the authors of this note hosted a conference entitled ‘Destabilized Science’ at the University of California, Los Angeles, to which we invited two representatives of core actors within the new science watchdog pack: Ivan Oransky, co-founder in 2010 of Retraction Watch, and Brandon Stell, co-founder in 2012 of PubPeer. After the formal conference, we organized a roundtable to discuss these invitees’ experience and their vision of contemporary science. Mario Biagioli (University of California, Davis), Michael Chwe (UCLA) and Aaron Panofsky (UCLA) participated to the conversation. An edited transcript of the discussion and a short podcast version are being published on Transmissions ( ssstransmissions.org ) the new blog associated with Social Studies of Science. </jats:p

From cellular memory to the memory of trauma: Social epigenetics and its public circulation

Trauma is associated with the appearance of the concept of ‘accident’ as a social and legal entity, as well as with the successive discoveries of surgery, psychiatrics, and psychoanalysis. Today, epigenetics has redefined trauma as an extreme form of social adversity. Because of the exceptional nature of the events studied and also the social and political significance of its results, the social epigenetics of historical trauma has received undeniable public success. The present article investigates the general dynamics of this research front, as well as the forms and consequences of its public circulation. We highlight the specificity of the circulation modes associated with social epigenetics and the myriad ways it has been used socially and politically. This study addresses four registers of action in particular: to attest, to repair, to intervene, and to treat. The social circulation of the epigenetics of trauma is as influenced by the public’s willingness to see it as socially and politically relevant as it is by the ability of researchers to prepare this collective appropriation through different forms of public engagement. Finally this study allows us to refute the dichotomic conception of the genetics/epigenetics relationship, which is too frequently the foundation for making epigenetics academically acceptable in the social sciences. </jats:p

Epigénétique et société : l'épigénétique dans la presse francophone

International audienc

De la génétique à l’épigénétique : une révolution « post-génomique » à l’usage des sociologues

International audienceCette note critique étudie l’impact de la révolution dite « post-génomique » pour les sciences sociales à partir de cinq ouvrages publiés entre 2016 et 2017. Il s’agit non seulement d’introduire le lecteur français à l’actualité des débats dans les pays anglo-saxons sur la redéfinition en cours des frontières entre sociologie et biologie, mais également et surtout de contribuer à la réflexion sur l’évolution des pratiques de recherche interdisciplinaires. Une attention particulière est accordée au domaine émergent de l’épigénétique et à la manière dont il est représenté par ces ouvrages comme le lieu par excellence de la révolution post-génomique. L’article souligne l’importance pour les sociologues de prendre conscience des opportunités associées à cette révolution, tout comme de s’affranchir d’un certain nombre d’idées reçues. Il insiste également sur la nécessité de maintenir une distance critique suffisante par rapport à un domaine de recherche « prometteur »

Epigenetics in the public sphere: interdisciplinary perspectives

Abstract Despite the high public interest in epigenetics, few scholars have empirically investigated the forms, reasons and consequences of the public circulation of epigenetics. Using an original database focusing on ‘lifestyle’ or ‘everyday’ epigenetics, this article aims to promote an open-minded and interdisciplinary dialogue between the public appropriation of epigenetics and the current scientific state of the art. It raises three main questions: Are there any specific modes of circulation of epigenetics in the general public? Why does epigenetics seem so appealing to the public? Within the public repertoire of epigenetics, is it possible to identify some specific knowledge claims and, if so, given the current state of the art, what is their degree of accuracy? The article argues that the social diffusion of epigenetics frequently carries on beliefs and misconceptions about genetics and epigenetics. The social life of epigenetics fuels a collective ‘illusion’ of control and empowerment on the basis of which new markets expand. More unexpectedly, this article underlines the emergence of a new scientific culture, i.e. the ‘scientifization’ of the cultural appropriation of epigenetics. Our analysis can inform the scientific community about the current and evolving state of the public representation of epigenetics and help it frame outreach activities.</jats:p