Difference between revisions of "Links on problems in academia"

(Fraud and retraction)
Line 64: Line 64:
 
* [http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57449/ 10 retractions and counting]
 
* [http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57449/ 10 retractions and counting]
 
* [http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/uconn-resveratrol-researcher-dipak-das-fingered-in-sweeping-misconduct-case/ UConn fraud case]
 
* [http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/uconn-resveratrol-researcher-dipak-das-fingered-in-sweeping-misconduct-case/ UConn fraud case]
 +
* [http://blogs.nature.com/ofschemesandmemes/2012/03/06/march%E2%80%99s-sonyc-on-setting-the-research-record-straight-%E2%80%93-what-retractions-tell-us-about-setting-the-research-record-straight What retractions tell us about setting the research record straight]
  
 
===Peer review===
 
===Peer review===

Revision as of 14:15, 6 March 2012

This is just a backup of a bookmark folder, will structure it later.

Academic career

Generic

Ph.D.

Postdocs

Coming back

  • Reentering Academia - A Success Story I knew that I could be a reasonable scientist given the chance. I eventually managed to convince people here in Oxford that I could be taken back on as a postdoc.


Finding a job after academia

Academia as a workplace

Fraud and retraction

Peer review

Plagiarism


Philosophical defenses

Inefficiencies

Italy

Open science

Image