We’ve all seen the papers. You know, the ones that report a finding without citing the group that presented the same result years before. Or, more egregiously, claim outright to be the first to report it, when a simple literature search would reveal that not to be the case.
It’s a problem that affects every area of research: Authors omitting key citations, making the results appear more novel than they actually are. Sometimes it’s the result of an innocent oversight, sometimes an outright intent to deceive. The question is:
What should be done about it?
We’re resurrecting a regular feature on the site — “ask Retraction Watch” — to get your thoughts on the topic. Below, let us know how often you notice papers that lack essential citations — and how you believe journals should handle such omissions.
I voted that (a) less than 25% of papers that I read (but more than 10%) omit key references and (b) journals should correct the oversight when it is found. Like, how hard can that be? It could be 1-2 journal pages each year ... small costs, large benefits.
