• inconel@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I only encountered once, but when it happened I had to realize how old science field may have been different. The exact detail I was looking for should be in [20] … but “[20] to be published” (presumably by the same author). I couldn’t find any papers by author’s name other than that but the author was so sure getting published.

    • frustratedphagocytosis@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      My favorite is recursive bad citations in the method section. As in, citing a paper that cited a previous paper that itself cited a previous paper that cited an abstract with no detailed methodology whatsoever, leaving the true methods a mystery unless you get the senior author to reply to emails.