About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘the netherlands’ Category

Second Nature paper by researcher found to have violated academic integrity retracted

with 11 comments

dhonukshe

Pankaj Dhonukshe

A second Nature paper co-authored by Pankaj Dhonukshe, formerly of Utrecht University and VIB Ghent, has been retracted.

Here’s the notice for “Generation of cell polarity in plants links endocytosis, auxin distribution and cell fate decisions:” Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 16, 2014 at 5:50 pm

Retractions arrive in plagiarism scandal involving economist Nijkamp

with 92 comments

nijkampRetractions have arrived in the case of Peter Nijkamp, a leading Dutch economist accused of duplication and plagiarism. The Review of Economic Analysis has removed two of Nijkamp’s articles for self-plagiarism.

According to the NRC Handelsblad website (courtesy of Google translate):

The affair university economics professor Peter Nijkamp and his PhD student Karima Kourtit has escalated. The editors of the journal Review of Economic Analysis (RoEA) appears to have withdrawn because of self-plagiarism two scientific articles (reuse your own work earlier without acknowledgment), NRC Handelsblad discovered last week at the RoEA website.

The website reports that “significant parts” of the reclusive articles have appeared in other publications Nijkamp and Nijkamp / Kourtit, without reference orderlyearlier. It involves work Nijkamp alone and work of VU economist Frank Bruinsma with Nijkamp and Kourtit.

Read the rest of this entry »

Förster on defense again, this time weighing in on timeline controversy

with 71 comments

forster-j-aScience reported last week that Jens Förster, the former University of Amsterdam social psychologist embroiled in data fabrication controversy, may have stumbled in his defense by muddling the timeline of his disputed studies in public statements.

According to a piece by Frank van Kolfschooten (which is behind a paywall, and to which we linked in Saturday’s Weekend Reads):

The real challenge to Förster’s timeline may lie in e-mails between him and Pieter Verhoeven, his research assistant at UvA from September 2008 to June 2009, who made the correspondence available to Förster’s accuser. In it, the two discuss how to conduct what are evidently the same experiments Förster’s blog declares were completed much earlier in Bremen. For instance, among the stimuli used are three unintelligible audio recordings, which the 2011 paper says were described to the subjects as “Moldavian” poems. In an 18 May 2009 e-mail, Verhoeven comes up with the idea to describe the poem that way, rather than as Malaysian, because the reader of the poem has a German accent.

But in a yet another lengthy open letter to colleagues and friends, Förster insists that he conducted the studies in Germany before coming to the University of Amsterdam. And he hints darkly at the end that those seeking to cast doubt on his research may be doing so for personal gain: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

June 2, 2014 at 10:30 am

Second paper falls for ex-Leiden researcher accused of fraud

leave a comment »

atrdLast November we wrote about the retraction of a 2010 paper in PNAS by Annemie Schuerwegh and colleagues. Schuerwegh had been fired from Leiden University in The Netherlands for fraud, which said there would be a second retraction coming.

It has.

The article, “Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis: a functional role for mast cells and basophils?” had appeared in the Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. According to the retraction notice: Read the rest of this entry »

“Blameworthy inaccuracies:” Dirk Smeesters up to six retractions

with 8 comments

smeestersDirk Smeesters, the former Erasmus University psychology researcher found to have committed misconduct, is up to half a dozen retractions.

Both notices, in the Journal of Consumer Research, where Smeesters has already had one retraction, are paywalled. Here’s one, for a paper cited seven times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

May 22, 2014 at 11:30 am

“I never manipulated data”: Förster defends actions in open letter

with 132 comments

forster-j-a

Jens Förster

Jens Förster, the Dutch social psychologist accused of misconduct, has posted an open letter on his lab’s website in which he denies wrongdoing.

The letter, in English and dated May 11, offers a detailed rebuttal to the investigation’s conclusions. It also offers a rationale for Förster’s decision not to post his data on the Internet. And it’s followed by a briefer letter from Nira Liberman, who identifies herself as a collaborator of Förster’s.

We present the letter in full below:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

May 12, 2014 at 10:16 am

Förster report cites “unavoidable” conclusion of data manipulation

with 117 comments

forster-j-a

Jens Förster

Last week we wrote about the 2012 complaint that triggered the investigation into Jens Förster, the social psychologist at the University of Amsterdam whose work has come under scrutiny for possible fraud.

Now we have the findings of the official investigation by Landelijk Orgaan Wetenschappelijke Integriteit (the Dutch National Board for Scientific Integrity, often referred to as LOWI) — which clearly indicates that the institution believes Förster made up results.

Here are some of the highlights from the document, which we’ve had translated by a Dutch speaker:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

May 7, 2014 at 10:00 am

Anatomy of an inquiry: The report that led to the Jens Förster investigation

with 239 comments

forster-j-a

Jens Förster

We have obtained a copy of the report that led to the investigation of Jens Förster, the social psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, which is calling for the retraction of a 2012 article by the researcher for manipulated data.

As we reported earlier, Förster has denied any wrongdoing in the matter.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

April 30, 2014 at 4:10 pm

Social psychologist Förster denies misconduct, calls charge “terrible misjudgment”

with 55 comments

forster-j-a

Jens Förster

Retraction Watch has obtained an email from Jens Förster, the social psychologist in the Netherlands who, as Dutch media reported this week, was the target of a misconduct investigation at the University of Amsterdam. The inquiry led to the call for the retraction of a paper by Förster and a colleague, Markus Denzler, over concerns of data manipulation.

Förster denies those claims and said Denzler was not involved in the heavy lifting for the study in question: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

April 30, 2014 at 10:06 am

New Dutch psychology scandal? Inquiry cites data manipulation, calls for retraction

with 28 comments

sppsThe University of Amsterdam has called for the retraction of a 2011 paper by two psychology researchers after a school investigation concluded that the article contained bogus data, the Dutch press are reporting.

The paper, “Sense Creative! The Impact of Global and Local Vision, Hearing, Touching, Tasting and Smelling on Creative and Analytic Thought,” was written by Jens Förster and Markus Denzler  and published in Social Psychological & Personality Science. It purported to find that:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

April 29, 2014 at 10:30 am

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,694 other followers