Ivan Oransky is editor-in-chief of The Transmitter, having previously served in editorial leadership roles at outlets including Medscape, Reuters Health and Scientific American. He is a distinguished journalist-in-residence at New York University’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, where he teaches medical journalism, and co-founder of Retraction Watch, which reports on scientific retractions.
Ivan Oransky
Editor-in-chief
The Transmitter
”Our goal for The Transmitter is ambitious but clear. We aspire to become an essential resource for neuroscientists at all career stages, and to help them stay current and build connections.
From this contributor
Neuroscientist Gerry Fischbach, in his own words
By
Ivan Oransky
30 May 2025 | 2 min read
Journal retracts paper on plant beauty that cited autism study
By
Ivan Oransky
25 April 2022 | 2 min read
Education
- M.D., New York University
- B.A. in biology, Harvard University
Articles
- “Punishing misconduct: Sanctions for fraudulent research in anesthesia and beyond” | Anesthesia & Analgesia
- “Rooting out scientific misconduct” | Science
- “Please don’t cite this editorial” | Journal of Clinical Anesthesia
- “The scientific literature can’t save you now” | The Atlantic
- “Taking it back: A pilot study of a rubric measuring retraction notice quality” | Accountability in Research
- “Data sleuths’ work is thankless. They must get credit for retractions” | Times Higher Education
- “Retractions are increasing, but not enough” | Nature
- “How bibliometrics and school rankings reward unreliable science” | The BMJ
- “Institutional research misconduct reports need more credibility” | JAMA
- “Science corrects itself, right? A scandal at Stanford says it doesn’t” | Scientific American
- “Reasonable versus unreasonable doubt” | American Scientist
Book chapters
- “Journals, peer review, and preprints,” in “A Tactical Guide to Science Journalism: Lessons From the Front Lines”
- “Retraction Watch: What we’ve learned and how metrics play a role,” in “Gaming the Metrics: Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research”
- “Pseudoscience, coming to a peer-reviewed journal near you,” in “Pseudoscience: The Conspiracy Against Science”
- “Will improvements in health journalism improve health literacy?” in “Volume 269: Health Literacy in Clinical Practice and Public Health”
Explore more from The Transmitter
From friend to foe: How the brain updates feelings toward others
A specific hippocampus-to-amygdala pathway reassigns emotional valence to a known individual, whereas the hippocampus’s own representation of that individual’s identity remains stable.
From friend to foe: How the brain updates feelings toward others
A specific hippocampus-to-amygdala pathway reassigns emotional valence to a known individual, whereas the hippocampus’s own representation of that individual’s identity remains stable.
By
Natalia Mesa
9 July 2026 | 5 min read
Mass-produced science is coming. What happens to scientists?
Artificial intelligence may soon enable researchers to generate high-quality science at a previously unimaginable speed. For science consumers—the public, medical patients, technology users—the likely effects will be positive. For scientists, the effects will be as disruptive as industrial mass production was for artisan manufacturers.
Mass-produced science is coming. What happens to scientists?
Artificial intelligence may soon enable researchers to generate high-quality science at a previously unimaginable speed. For science consumers—the public, medical patients, technology users—the likely effects will be positive. For scientists, the effects will be as disruptive as industrial mass production was for artisan manufacturers.
By
Kenneth Harris
9 July 2026 | 9 min read
Neuropathologist not guilty of research misconduct, says university probe
The investigation determined that seven papers by corresponding author Adriano Aguzzi have “scientifically significant” errors, which Aguzzi attributes to his former students.
Neuropathologist not guilty of research misconduct, says university probe
The investigation determined that seven papers by corresponding author Adriano Aguzzi have “scientifically significant” errors, which Aguzzi attributes to his former students.
By
Dalmeet Singh Chawla
8 July 2026 | 5 min read