Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Double trouble: Psych journal prints PTSD paper twice

without comments

Aging & Mental Health “welcomes original contributions” to fill its pages.

Or not so original. Last November, the journal published a study by two California researchers which looked at the possible effects of post-traumatic stress disorder on physical well-being in older women – and found no evidence of such a link.

Six months later, the journal published the findings again.

It issued a retraction earlier this month, which included the following:

Taylor & Francis would like to apologise unreservedly for any confusion caused and note that this was not the fault of the authors. As such the article is hereby retracted.

Perhaps the journal’s editors felt some pressure to fill its pages, since it will be going from six issues per year to eight in 2010. The editors  referred our inquiries to the publisher, who has yet to respond.

Co-author Luciana Laganà, a clinical psychologist at California State University Northridge, says she learned of the duplicate publication by chance:

They sent me the copy of the issue in which I was re-published as a courtesy to the author. I then contacted them to tell them that this article was already published. … They apologized for the duplication and were very supportive.

Hewing to custom, the abstracts of the repeated articles end with the following caveat:

additional research on larger samples is needed to corroborate these findings.

Indeed.

Written by amarcus41

August 23rd, 2010 at 9:00 am

Comments
  • anon October 21, 2010 at 9:25 pm

    I’ve seen one of these happen before in lit that I follow. I assume it is just a weird publisher screw up..hardly worthy of Retraction Watch, is it?

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.