India Research Watch (IRW)

Most important list if India wants to improve its Scientific Reputation. High time that retractions are included in rankings. Else universities have every incentive to publish as much as they can without caring about consequences. Data in thread 👇 @ugc_india @ANRFIndia

@amitavb1 Hope in future presentations you also present the retraction statistics of India. Seeing the graph for India will perhaps make people understand how big the problem is in India.

Are we pushing the science community towards research and publishing fraud by coercion to publish against their "informed consent?" youtu.be/yiLAR8AKkdw?si… @IRWatchdog

'NIRF parameters ill-designed & lead to absurd university ratings. Govt must order a review' Achal Agrawal, founder of India Research Watch & Moumita Koley, research associate at DST-CPR, IISc, write #ThePrintOpinion theprint.in/opinion/nirf-p…

The health of India's higher education exposed by a data scientist.

@Dr_5GH @t_a_abdul @PredatoryReport @fake_journals @AbalkinaAnna @MicrobiomDigest @mumumouse2 @Thatsregrettab1 @FPapermill70800 @Spottingthespot Thanks for sharing. This is an important update.

@t_a_abdul @PredatoryReport @fake_journals @IRWatchdog @AbalkinaAnna @MicrobiomDigest @mumumouse2 @Thatsregrettab1 @FPapermill70800 @Spottingthespot Thanks for sharing

Web of Science has announced its monthly update (December Update). In this update, 11 journals were delisted from the Web of Science index. 4 journals were delisted due to editorial de-listing, while 7 journals were delisted due to production de-listing.

👇

Our founder 💪💪

Achal Agrawal realised how ingrained research misconduct had become, and resolved to do something about the issue He is part of Nature’s 10, a list of people who shaped science in 2025 go.nature.com/4p7pESd

How to juice your Google Scholar h-index, preprint by preprint. retractionwatch.com/2025/12/08/how…

Our founder was part of Nature's 10 people who shaped Science in 2025. We thank @MiryamNaddaf and @Nature for recognizing our work.

@fake_journals Would suggest to mask the contact details while sharing such information. Otherwise it might inadvertently advertising for them. I feel @author_for_sale should also follow that.

“We can write your thesis” is contract cheating. I came across this Facebook advert recently which promoted “Need a thesis that is 100% original and designed according to your needs? Don't worry! We will help you write your thesis from scratch and make it a successful one in no time.” Let’s be clear, genuine academic support is important. Students need guidance, mentoring, and sometimes structured help. But crossing the line into outsourcing the entire thesis is not “support.” It’s contract cheating. Services like this create (at least) three problems: 1️⃣ They undermine the value of genuine scholarship. A thesis is meant to demonstrate a student’s ability to think, design, analyse and communicate. If the work is purchased, the student has not demonstrated any of these traits. 2️⃣ They create unfairness. Students who conduct their own research are competing with others who simply pay for a thesis. This is unfair in, say, the job market, be that an industrial position, or one at a university. 3️⃣ They harm the integrity of higher education. When degrees are obtained through work written by someone else, it erodes trust in institutions, supervisors, and the broader academic community. Most worrying of all, adverts like this normalise the idea that academic work is something to be bought rather than learned. And once normalised, it becomes harder for universities to maintain meaningful standards. Support is vital. But honest support - real feedback, clear supervision and research training is required. Writing a student’s thesis for them does the opposite. Curious to hear others’ experiences: how widespread do you think these services have become, and what should institutions be doing in response? Facebook advert: buff.ly/jfCR8lq (archived at buff.ly/h1rnuoG)

Root cause for the increase in misconduct is misplaced metrics. Obvious flaws & loopholes are being exploited NIRF metrics have not changed in a decade Measures like retraction penalty are necessary, but we must not be complacent. A flex tape isn't going to plug a gaping hole

A very interesting second session indeed at the #SJAIConference2025 by @SciJournIndia & @AhdUniv Fraud, Flaws, & Fixes: #Journalism to Restore Research Integrity @Subhrapr asks a critical question - what and where should journalists be looking ? @IRWatchdog

Important and Interesting discussion.

We have fallen in the metrics trap. The developed world, which invented the metrics we chase, has moved on from the metrics. They know its limitations. We are chasing them and wasting our tremendous potential. We need to get out of that trap instead of celebrating it!

Brought to you by McGill University Journal impact factor=9.7; APC=$4690 pubpeer.com/publications/B…

India's latest university #rankings penalise #research paper retractions from academic journals for the first time, but the impact on ranking positions is still unclear, @shuriahn reports @IRWatchdog @RetractionWatch #NIRF2025 #nirfranking2025 universityworldnews.com/post.php?story…

NIRF announced that they will be penalising retractions this year. Yet, some universities with highest retraction rates in the world saw a massive increase in their research score.

Biggest Movers and Shakers in NIRF 2025 #NIRF2025 #nirfranking2025 #NIRF

What does it take to fight against unethical behavior in research publishing? Tune in to our latest discussion with Achan Agarwal @IRWatchd , where we talk about his double career as an scientist and plagiarism sleuth.