4 ms·

True. However, if your comment about is about gender, that would only be true if you think that women are less likely than men to get caught falsifying data (th

by et2o 8y ago

True. However, if your comment about is about gender, that would only be true if you think that women are less likely than men to get caught falsifying data (there was differential detection by gender). I can't imagine why that would be the case. Edit: this was in response to your comment before your edit I agree retractions are an imperfect measure, but it's not like there is much more to go on. Most importantly, the 30 people on this leaderboard who have dozens of retracted papers are not just people who got unlucky with sampling or made one mistake and had to retract a paper–they are those who repeatedly and knowingly faked data and then published it.

whatshisface 8y ago
Retractions aren't issued just for falsifying data. Each field has its own culture of retracting papers, some only retracting deliberate fraud (each one with a different standard of evidence), and others retracting mistakes as well. It is also well-known that certain countries contribute more than others to scientific fraud - and it would be unlikely for them to all have exactly the same gender ratio. By the time all of these factors (along with whatever else can be thought of) are included there might be a lot less statistical significance left than we started with.
- et2o 8y ago
  The retractions of people on this top 30 list are generally for falsifying data, severe plagiarism, or other misbehavior which would fall into the category of deliberate fraud. I don't disagree that the rate of misbehavior and gender balance of scientists differ internationally and would ideally be factored into an analysis.
Faark 8y ago
Do we always have to do the gender discussion? Don't get me wrong, I'd love a real scientific analysis. But social media speculations with people trying to push their favorite ideology with at best some anecdotes seems like a huge waste of time. But to play the game... maybe woman are more likely to get caught falsifying data before publication, because the evil patriarchy thinks woman cannot to science and thus more rigorously verifies their results? We for sure could come up with lots of other crappy explanations and theories.
- et2o 8y ago
  I am a man with no gender agenda whatsoever. I was just trying to justify my pronoun :). Interesting to observe the level of vitriol pointing this out led to.

by et2o 8y ago

whatshisface 8y ago

Retractions aren't issued just for falsifying data. Each field has its own culture of retracting papers, some only retracting deliberate fraud (each one with a different standard of evidence), and others retracting mistakes as well. It is also well-known that certain countries contribute more than others to scientific fraud - and it would be unlikely for them to all have exactly the same gender ratio. By the time all of these factors (along with whatever else can be thought of) are included there might be a lot less statistical significance left than we started with.

et2o 8y ago
The retractions of people on this top 30 list are generally for falsifying data, severe plagiarism, or other misbehavior which would fall into the category of deliberate fraud. I don't disagree that the rate of misbehavior and gender balance of scientists differ internationally and would ideally be factored into an analysis.

Faark 8y ago

Do we always have to do the gender discussion? Don't get me wrong, I'd love a real scientific analysis. But social media speculations with people trying to push their favorite ideology with at best some anecdotes seems like a huge waste of time. But to play the game... maybe woman are more likely to get caught falsifying data before publication, because the evil patriarchy thinks woman cannot to science and thus more rigorously verifies their results? We for sure could come up with lots of other crappy explanations and theories.

et2o 8y ago
I am a man with no gender agenda whatsoever. I was just trying to justify my pronoun :). Interesting to observe the level of vitriol pointing this out led to.