In my prior career as an investigative science journalist and now as a whistleblower lawyer, I’ve seen institutions react to allegations of scientific fraud in two ways. The first could be called “Investigate and Disclose.” This strategy was exemplified by Bell Laboratories’ 2002 investigation of allegations that Jan Hendrik Schön, a member of the technical … Continue reading Guest post: When whistleblowers need lawyers
My laboratory at Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School studies genetic diseases that affect the skeletal system. We became interested in the protein osteocalcin after Gerard Karsenty at Columbia University reported in several papers using knockout mice – mice lacking the genes which produce osteocalcin – that osteocalcin is a bone-derived hormone that affects … Continue reading When an independent replication isn’t really independent
Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a judge’s ruling that a university could not revoke a … Continue reading Weekend reads: Article retracted because of “racial characterizations;” India’s high retraction rate; meet the fraud finder
Today colleges and universities face a crisis of accountability in two domains: scientific misconduct and sexual harassment or assault. Scientific misconduct and sexual harassment/assault are obviously different, but the way they are reported, handled, and play out have many similarities. Michael Chwe at the University of California in Los Angeles has been thinking about this for … Continue reading Scientific misconduct and sexual harassment: Similar problems with similar solutions?
Ever since we broke the news about the issues with the now-retracted Science paper about changing people’s minds on gay marriage, we’ve been the subject of a lot of press coverage, which has in turn led a number of people to ask us: Who has the most retractions? Well, we’ve tried to answer that in … Continue reading Who has the most retractions? Introducing the Retraction Watch leaderboard
The title of this post is the headline of our most recent column in LabTimes, which begins: As we write this in mid-August, Nature has already retracted seven papers in 2014. That’s not yet a record – for that, you’d have to go back to 2003’s ten retractions, in the midst of the Jan Hendrik … Continue reading Is it time for a retraction penalty?
This week’s Nature includes a refreshing and soul-searching editorial about retractions. Excerpt (we added links and corrected a misspelling and wrong country in the editorial after a reader noted the errors below): This year, Nature has published four retractions, an unusually large number. In 2009 we published one. Throughout the past decade, we have averaged … Continue reading Nature comes clean about retractions and why they’re on the rise