|
|
|
|
|
by feikname
1741 days ago
|
|
> Did YOU even check what you cite? I did completely read what was available to me without having an account. > The AUTHORS of the original paper got a dataset from a company. They didn't assume the fraud from the start and published the paper based on it. My comment is not about who the culprit is or isn't. Indeed, I don't mention anything about it. Rather, it's about how, as the title says, a WIDELY cited paper has fabricated data following rather (IMO) obvious red flag patterns and none of the people -who cited the paper- raised issues about that. Thus, I questioned whether scientists read or not the papers they cite in the parent post.
The question is not a judgment, I'm just truly curious since I'm not part of the formal academia, just an undergraduate. |
|