Controversies
In 2017, Springer removed access to hundreds of articles for Chinese users, cutting off access to articles related to Tibet, Taiwan, and Chinese politics and human rights issues.
The company retracted a paper in 2019, in its journal BMC Emergency Medicine due to a dubious peer-review process (a herpetologist could have denied the publication of the paper).
In July 2020, Springer Nature retracted a paper in the journal Society due to a dubious review process and criticism regarding racism.
In August 2020, Springer Nature was reported to have rejected the publication of an article at the behest of its co-publisher, Wenzhou Medical University, from a Taiwanese doctor because the word "China" was not placed after "Taiwan".
In November 2021, Springer Nature retracted 44 nonsense papers from the Arabian Journal of Geosciences after a lapse in the peer review process.
In August 2023, after an investigation, Springer Nature retracted a paper that claimed there is no evidence of a global climate crisis.
Read the full text
In October 2025, Anna Krylov, a professor of chemistry at the University of Southern California, published an open letter calling for a boycott of Nature journals, accusing the publisher of abandoning its scientific mission in favor of a "social justice agenda". Krylov criticized Nature Reviews Psychology for encouraging "citation justice" practices aimed at promoting works by authors from favored identity groups, and Nature Human Behaviour for publishing editorial guidance stating an intent to consider potential social harm when evaluating research submissions. The letter received support from evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. A Springer Nature spokesperson responded that citation diversity statements are optional for authors and do not affect content evaluation.
In November 2025, a reviewer for Discover Artificial Intelligence stated that "GPT-5 does not exist," treated the paper's subject matter as fictional, and declared its methodology "impossible." The author appealed, raising the possibility of AI-generated peer review. The journal found no evidence of AI involvement, characterizing the GPT-5 error as "a very minor element" and concluding that the review reflected "careful reading and domain expertise." The journal stated that "any editor or reviewer with basic research training in this field would reasonably reach the same conclusion."
Springer Nature's peer review policy asks peer reviewers not to upload manuscripts into generative AI tools, citing concerns about sensitive information and the limitations of AI. In April 2026, in correspondence with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Springer Nature stated that AI use by peer reviewers for language editing purposes may be considered acceptable on a case-by-case basis.
In 2026, Springer Nature announced that it would begin issuing expressions of concern for books while investigations into potential integrity issues are ongoing. Springer Nature also stated that it was reviewing and strengthening its book peer-review and research-integrity processes, including additional safeguards and post-publication reviews.
On 23 June 2026, Springer Nature announced the sale of Scientific American to LabX Media Group, to "divest its consumer media businesses" and focus on its core academic publishing. The Writers Guild of America East unit at the publication criticized the sale, along with the attendant layoff of 15 staff members including the majority of the unit's organizers and salary reductions for other staff, as motivated by union-busting and censorship. The sale took place 3 days before the NLRB counted unionization votes, which were 31 to 1 in favor of the union. On 30 June 2026, Scientific American staff held a rally outside Springer Nature's Manhattan offices in protest.
Lawsuits
In September 2024, Lucina Uddin, a neuroscience professor at UCLA, sued Springer Nature along with five other academic journal publishers in a proposed class-action lawsuit, alleging that the publishers violated antitrust law by agreeing not to compete against each other for manuscripts and by denying scholars payment for peer review services.
