About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘psychology’ Category

Rapid mood swing: PNAS issues Expression of Concern for controversial Facebook study

with 58 comments

pnas 1113The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) is subjecting a much-criticized study involving Facebook that it published just two weeks ago to an Expression of Concern.

From the abstract of the original study: Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 3, 2014 at 5:00 pm

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

“Misrepresentation,” “reckless disregard for basic scientific standards”: Hauser report reveals details of misconduct

with 14 comments

Harvard-logo_7Courtesy of a Freedom of Information Act request, The Boston Globe has a very good piece detailing what investigators found had actually happened in the Marc Hauser lab before the former Harvard psychology researcher resigned in 2011 and was found guilty of misconduct by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) in 2012.

The Globe requested the 2010 report Harvard sent the ORI. Here’s a summary:

The 85-page report details instances in which Hauser changed data so that it would show a desired effect. It shows that he more than once rebuffed or downplayed questions and concerns from people in his laboratory about how a result was obtained. The report also describes “a disturbing pattern of misrepresentation of results and shading of truth” and a “reckless disregard for basic scientific standards.”

The Globe quotes key passages from the report: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

May 30, 2014 at 8:50 am

“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

New Frontiers: Marc Hauser back publishing in scientific literature

with 17 comments

frontiers psychMarc Hauser, the psychology researcher who resigned from Harvard and was found by the Office of Research Integrity to have committed misconduct, has published two new papers.

Both papers appear in Frontiers in Psychology, the journal whose retraction of a controversial paper on conspiracy ideation and climate skepticism was, by the editors’ own admission, handled badly.

Here’s the abstract to “The mystery of language evolution:”

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

May 6, 2014 at 11:00 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 33,709 other followers