This recent article in the official journal of the Aus. Academy of Forensic Sciences includes hallucinated references. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10...., for example:

Happy to have a chat with you over email or Zoom, but I don't think you're correct here (I study Daubert and other reliability standards). Generally, I think you are mixing up admissibility and proof. And you might be surprised that courts haven't been very interested in the 'crisis' narrative:

You might note here that this was subjected to transparent peer review, with an assessment that was quite critical: metaror.org/kotahi/artic...

Very pleased to see this positive experience with our publish, review, curate platform, @metaror.bsky.social: upstream.force11.org/response-to-...

Proud to be on this great panel to talk about the g2i problem - I'll be talking about producing better group/framework evidence through systematic reviews. With @teneille.bsky.social et al at www.gironaevidenceweek.com

Good old benefit and feasibility. 0/5 now for me-led projects at the ARC.

MetaROR (metaror.org) is now officially launched - rigorous, community-owned, and transparent peer review for metaresearch. @aimosinc.bsky.social and @rorinstitute.bsky.social

I'm finally decompressing after giving three talks and organising a conference in the span of a week. If you're interested, the talks were about systematic reviews in the legal system (osf.io/t5sbg) and trust in law (osf.io/m6qbp), the latter for #AIMOS2023

Eugenie Reich on the factors that make whistle blowing difficult #aimos2023

Kristin Sainani on improving sports science at #aimos2023

Metaresearch cited by the High Court of Australia! With Hayley Cullen and @bethclarke.bsky.social! eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showCase/202...

Increases in mentions of "research integrity" OR "scientific integrity" from Scopus, and I think it outpaces the general uptick in outputs over the past few years (this excludes what Scopus calls "errata"). Any thoughts on this?