3 ms·
The details here are light and opaque - was this due to a technical error with their approval workflow, rogue editors, or just poor reviewers? Either way this s
by throwawaysea 5y ago
The details here are light and opaque - was this due to a technical error with their approval workflow, rogue editors, or just poor reviewers? Either way this seems like a good time to bring up a past HN discussion, “Why we shouldn’t take peer review as the ‘gold standard’”
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20607259 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20607259
- greenyoda 5y agoA somewhat related article from earlier today: Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27884233 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27884233 Apparently, a lot of outright fraud gets through the peer review process, and only a small fraction of fraudulent papers get retracted after they're discovered.