About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Yogurt to be kidding me: Five articles plagiarized in one retracted paper

with one comment

After typing up 96 citations, researchers from the National Institute for Digestive Diseases, I.R.C.C.S. “S. de Bellis,” in Bari, Italy, apparently ran out of steam for the last five, earning themselves a retraction for plagiarism in a literature review of the effects of probiotics on intestinal cancer.

Here’s the notice for “Intestinal Microbiota, Probiotics and Human Gastrointestinal Cancers,” from the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer: Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Accounting professor faked data for two studies, destroyed evidence: University report

with 11 comments

James Hunton, via Bentley University

James Hunton, via Bentley University

The Bentley University accounting professor whose retraction we first reported on in November 2012 fabricated the data behind two papers, a university investigation has concluded.

James E. Hunton, who resigned in December 2012: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 22, 2014 at 7:00 am

Publishing gadfly demands journal editor’s resignation, then has “fairly incomprehensible” paper rejected

with 27 comments

sci eng ethicsA scientific publishing gadfly who was banned earlier this year from an Elsevier journal for “personal attacks and threats” has had a paper rejected by a Springer journal after he called for the editor’s resignation because of alleged incompetence.

As detailed in a comment left at Retraction Watch, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva submitted a manuscript titled “One Conjunction, a World of Ethical Difference: How Elsevier, the ICMJE and Neurology Define Authorship” to Science and Engineering Ethics on November 11, 2012. As of last week, despite a number of messages sent to editors of the journal, he had not had a decision on the manuscript.

As a result, on July 14 of this year, Teixeira da Silva sent this letter to journal editor Raymond Spier and to Stephanie Bird, an editorial board member assigned to the manuscript: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm

Editorial mix-up leads to duplication, retraction of physics paper

with one comment

A missed withdrawal request has ed to doubled up publication and a later retraction for Brazilian physicists, through no fault of their own.

Atmospheric Plasma Treatment of Carbon Fibers for Enhancement of Their Adhesion Properties” was presented at an Institute of Physics (IOP) conference in 2010. The proceedings weren’t published until May 2014.

In the meantime, the plasma scientists withdrew their paper from consideration and submitted it to IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, where it was published in February 2013. Unfortunately, in the four year delay between the conference and the Institute of Physics publication, the withdrawal request got lost.

Here’s the notice: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

July 21, 2014 at 11:30 am

Boeing engineer has two papers retracted for duplication

with one comment

j sound vibrationThe editor of the Journal of Sound and Vibration has retracted two papers by a Boeing engineer because the author reused his previous work.

Here’s the notice for “A component-based model for aircraft landing gear noise prediction,” by Yueping Guo: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 21, 2014 at 9:30 am

Weekend reads: How to fix “slow,” “unhelpful,” and “generally awful” peer review, where all the PhDs go

with 9 comments

booksAnother busy week at Retraction Watch, but there was lots happening elsewhere, too: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 19, 2014 at 10:06 am

Posted in weekend reads

Authors of three retracted PLOS ONE papers to retract four more, with one researcher resigning

with 22 comments

ChemosphereThe hits keep coming for a research group at the Institute of Microbial Technology (IMTECH) in Chandigarh, India.

Last week, we reported that PLoS ONE was retracting three papers by the research group because “there are no data available underlying this study and thus…the published results are fabricated.” Now, according to The Hindu, four more papers are being retracted:
Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,665 other followers