JEG<p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00676-1" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">nature.com/articles/d41586-025</span><span class="invisible">-00676-1</span></a><br>There's a correlation between sexual <a href="https://mstdn.science/tags/misconduct" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>misconduct</span></a> accusations and a drop in citations for the scholars accused, while that's not the case for fraudsters. In both cases there is a drop in publications, and the puzzling thing is that - looking at the raw data in the original paper <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317736" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0</span><span class="invisible">317736</span></a> - the trend seems to begin before the accusations emerge. It raises the question of in which direction does the causality go.<br><a href="https://mstdn.science/tags/ResearchMisconduct" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>ResearchMisconduct</span></a> <a href="https://mstdn.science/tags/Science" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>Science</span></a> <a href="https://mstdn.science/tags/SexualHarassment" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>SexualHarassment</span></a></p>