About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘behind a paywall’ Category

Hayabusa Science retraction made official, but behind a paywall

leave a comment »

science 62714Science has published the retraction of a 2006 paper about an asteroid, following a report in its news pages that the study’s authors had requested the move.

Here’s the paywalled — tsk, tsk — notice: Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 15, 2014 at 11:30 am

Chemical engineering journal retracts paper with unknowing author

with 4 comments

AiChemE-logoAIChemE’s website promises, “Subscribing to the AIChE Journal is like having access to nine topical journals in the field.”

Without a subscription, though, you might miss out on some valuable topical information – like why a paper you want to cite has been retracted, something the Committee on Publication Ethics recommends be freely available.

Here’s the notice for “Flow Structure and Particle Motions in a Gas-Polyethylene Fluidized Bed,” originally published in 2007:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

September 10, 2014 at 11:00 am

Retraction appears for psychiatrist sought for arrest in alleged fraud scheme

with 6 comments

malafosse

Alain Malafosse, via University of Geneva

Want bogus data, million-dollar fraud allegations and a scientist on the lam? We give you Alain Malafosse.

The British Journal of Psychiatry has retracted a June 2013 paper by Malafosse and his colleagues on the genetics of bipolar disorder in children because Malafosse allegedly fabricated key data in the study.

The article, “Childhood maltreatment and methylation of the glucocorticoid receptor gene NR3C1 in bipolar disorder,” purported to find that people with bipolar disorder who had experienced more, and more severe, abuse early in life were more likely to show epigenetic changes. According to the abstract:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Adam Marcus

September 4, 2014 at 9:30 am

New method sinks newish paper…or does it?

with 6 comments

cover_2009_BB_viz_biomassThe timing on a recent retraction of a paper from Biotechnology and Bioengineering makes it a bit difficult to figure out what happened, but here’s a try.

An article first published online May 16th by a group of researchers at Brown University was retracted on June 1st, apparently because a new and better method for analyzing the data was developed…at some point.

The timeline is not exactly clear from the retraction, though we’ve reached out to the author and publisher and will update with any new information.

Here’s the (paywalled) notice for “High-level production of 3-hydroxypropionatein Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae by introducing part of the 3-hydroxypropionate/4-hydroxybutyrate cycle from Metallosphaera sedula”:

Read the rest of this entry »

Mega-correction appears for Florida leadership scholar Walumbwa following six retractions

with 3 comments

Fred Walumbwa, via FIU

Fred Walumbwa, via FIU

Fred Walumbwa, the leadership researcher at Florida International University who has retracted six papers for what appear to be problematic data, now has an impressive mega-correction in the form of an “addendum.”

The paper, “Relationships between Authentic Leadership, Moral Courage, and Ethical and Pro-Social Behaviors,” was published in Business Ethics Quarterly in October 2011, by Walumbwa and two colleagues, Sean Hannah and Bruce Avolio.

Here’s the abstract for the paper, which has been cited 18 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge:

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Adam Marcus

July 30, 2014 at 11:00 am

Incorrect analysis leads to Nature’s sixth retraction in 2014

with 5 comments

nature 714In what seems to be an example of researchers swiftly and transparently correcting the literature, and acknowledging errors, a pair of scientists have retracted a 2013 paper from Nature.

Here’s the retraction notice for “Genomic organization of human transcription initiation complexes,” by Bryan Venters and Frank Pugh: Read the rest of this entry »

Recursive plagiarism? Researchers may have published a duplicate of a study retracted for plagiarism

with 15 comments

acta physica sinicaSometimes plagiarism, like an onion, has layers.

That appears to be the case in a paper brought to our attention by sharp-eyed reader Vladimir Baulin, whose work was copied in a 2006 paper that Journal of Biological Physics retracted for plagiarism.

But you can’t keep a good thief down: the plagiarizing authors just popped up in a new journal with a Chinese-language version of their retracted paper, that looks an awful lot like a knock-off. Here’s a note from Baulin: Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 34,910 other followers