Retracting testing content - what do you think?

🙋 Questions
, ,
1

I recently saw an article published in Nature magazine about a new record of 10000 retractions of research papers in 2023. Integrity experts say that this is only the tip of the iceberg.

More than 100,000 in the last 20 years overall retracted.
The IEEE, one of the main bodies retracting these, also has similar issues.
Retraction Watch has found issues such as “tortured phrases, citation fraud and plagiarism, in hundreds of IEEE papers published in the past few years,” Van Noorden adds.

Another involved party is: https://retractionwatch.com/

I’m also imagining that all this content is fed online, to AI and all data miners, and then reused in various forms.

This made me think of software testing and the amount of content that is out there.

  • What content do you feel should be retracted?
  • Who/what should do the reviews and mark them for retraction?
  • Do you feel that maybe we’re fine and we should allow anything?
5 Likes
2

New features that are written that don’t answer what the customer needs maybe should be auto-retracted :slight_smile: :sweat_smile:

2 Likes
3

I think the Automation Testing Pyramid, while maybe not retracted, should be carefully re-explained by the authors (if possible).

I do know there are plenty of rebuttals to it, but it seems like it constantly comes up out of the proper context.

Also, any article that promises 100% automation. :smiley:

3 Likes