About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

What’s new is not new again: Ulrich Lichtenthaler retracts eighth paper

with 6 comments

The list of Ulrich Lichtenthaler retractions has grown to eight.

Here’s the new notice, for “Externally commercializing technology assets: An examination of different process stages,” from the Journal of Business Venturing:

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy).

This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief and Author.

The author contacted the Editor-in-Chief about statistical irregularities in this article in July 2012. The Editor-in-Chief thoroughly investigated this article and other preceding papers from the same database. On this basis, the Editor-in-Chief made the decision to retract the paper. The grounds for retraction are an error in statistical analyses, an omitted variable bias, and a “new” measure that was not “new” because it was already used in Lichtenthaler, U. and Ernst, H., Res. Policy, 36 (2007) 37–55, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.08.005. These errors undermined the review process and are too substantial for a corrigendum.

The paper has been cited 15 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge, including a few times by Lichtenthaler himself.

Hat tip: Commenter “innovation”

About these ads

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. How can these guys (Prof. Ernst included) seriously still sit on their chairs and teach students & Phds?


    November 21, 2012 at 8:12 am

  2. Does SCOPUS or similar databases flag papers for which corrections or retractions have been made? If not, have they been queried as to whether they would do so? I’ve just now down a document search in SCOPUS using the term ‘retraction’ for occurrences in ‘Article Title, Abstract, Keywords’, but only recovered 4 retraction notices.

    I can see many folks citing references ID’ed from various databases with no idea that they have been retracted or corrected.

    PS. I’ve become a regular Retraction Watch reader and have forwarded the URL to numerous colleagues and students. Thanks for your efforts.

    Kevin Floate

    November 21, 2012 at 11:21 am

  3. some times scientists are also not flagged – they keep getting grants even if they have one or two or more papers retracted due to irregularities…let alone citations…

    Ressci Integrity

    November 22, 2012 at 4:01 am

  4. New Retractions

    April 2, 2013 at 2:11 pm

We welcome comments. Please read our comments policy at http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/the-retraction-watch-faq/ and leave your comment below.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 35,810 other followers

%d bloggers like this: