Doing the right thing: Authors retract lubricant paper whose findings they can’t reproduce

wearcoverThe journal Wear — an Elsevier title, not a Condé Nast fashion magazine — has retracted a paper by a pair of Chinese physicists after the researchers were unable to replicate their findings.

The 2009 article, “Microstructure and tribological characterizations of Ni based self-lubricating coating,” was written by authors from the MOE Key Laboratory for Nonequilibrium Synthesis and Modulation of Condensed Matter and the MOE Key Laboratory for Strength and Vibration at Jiaotong University, in Xi’an. It purported to find that: Continue reading Doing the right thing: Authors retract lubricant paper whose findings they can’t reproduce

Fight against false copyright claims goes to Capitol Hill

automattcRetraction Watch readers may recall that in November, we, along with Automattic, the company behind WordPress, filed a lawsuit against someone who filed a false copyright infringement claim about ten of our posts.

On a false pretense — copying and pasting the posts onto a website in India, then claiming that we had plagiarized that site — that person used a law known as the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) to force WordPress to remove our posts. Here’s why WordPress had to do that, as Ars Technica had put it a few years earlier: Continue reading Fight against false copyright claims goes to Capitol Hill

Sports columnist Reilly loses ESPN.com gig after replaying his work

Rick Reilly
Rick Reilly

Rick Reilly, a noted sports columnist, once wrote about football replays:

Tell me if I’m a crank, but do you notice that every time a football replay comes up—and I mean every time—the color guy goes, “OK, now watch this!” I mean, what else are we gonna do? Suddenly start knitting a sweater? Start collecting for UNICEF? You don’t need to tell us to watch the TV set we’re already watching! OK, maybe I am a crank.

But readers of Reilly might well have wondered why they were being subjected to replays of his work. His bosses at ESPN.com evidently did, because they’ve unplugged the writer’s keyboard in the wake of a self-plagiarism scandal, according to news reports. Such self-plagiarism — more accurately referred to as duplication — is of course a frequent reason for retractions.

Deadspin offers a nice side-by-side of the similarities between a recent Reilly column — titled, ironically, “Don’t act like you’ve been there” — and one from 2009, brought to the publication’s attention by a reader. Some examples: Continue reading Sports columnist Reilly loses ESPN.com gig after replaying his work

Why was that lung cancer paper retracted? The “authors’ reason,” of course

jthordisTwo researchers who wrote a review article on the genetics of lung cancer have retracted the paper. But why evidently is for them to know and us to find out.

The article, “Epigenetic aberrant methylation of tumor suppressor genes in small cell lung cancer,” was published in the August 2013 issue of the Journal of Thoracic Disease by authors from Shandong University in China.

According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Why was that lung cancer paper retracted? The “authors’ reason,” of course

Tune into BBC Radio 4 today to hear Ivan talk about latest stem cell controversy, post-publication peer review

Ivan-OranskyIvan is scheduled to be on Inside Science on BBC Radio 4 at 12:30 p.m. Eastern (1630 UK time) to discuss the latest stem cell controversy, and what it says about the state of post-publication peer review. Continue reading Tune into BBC Radio 4 today to hear Ivan talk about latest stem cell controversy, post-publication peer review

In sharp resignation letter, former ORI director Wright criticizes bureaucracy, dysfunction

David Wright, via ORI
David Wright, via ORI

Last week, we reported that David Wright had resigned as director of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI). At the time, we noted we were short on details, but  Science has obtained Wright’s resignation letter, which sheds a great deal of light on the move.

In his letter, according to Science, Wright wrote that: Continue reading In sharp resignation letter, former ORI director Wright criticizes bureaucracy, dysfunction

Reverse peristalsis for gut journal which disgorges Cleveland Clinic paper for plagiarism

ajg_cimageThe American Journal of Gastroenterology has retracted a 2011 article on colon cancer by a group of Cleveland Clinic researchers after finding “evidence” of plagiarism in the text.

The article, a review, was titled “Molecular Pathways Underlying IBD-Associated Colorectal Neoplasia: Therapeutic Implications,” and has been cited 16 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

Here’s the retraction notice: Continue reading Reverse peristalsis for gut journal which disgorges Cleveland Clinic paper for plagiarism

Researchers invent time machine! (But too late to avoid retraction for duplication)

compinterfaceA common theme in movies involving time travel is that if you meet yourself in the past, you’ll upset the time-space continuum, and cause all sorts of problems. Well, a group of materials scientists in Hong Kong seems to have invented a time machine, and learned that if if you publish a paper that appears to have been published in the future, you’ll suffer a retraction (and correction) for duplicating your own data.

We’ll (try to) explain.

The group in 1997 published a paper in Composite Interfaces titled “Reliability of fiber Bragg grating sensors embedded in textile composites.”

But now comes the following — inscrutable — Corrigendum: Continue reading Researchers invent time machine! (But too late to avoid retraction for duplication)

Senator “unsatisfied” with ORI’s response on recovery of tainted grant money

ori logoMarch has come in like a lion for the folks at the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

The agency’s director, David Wright, stepped down late last month for reasons that even now remain unclear. And in what seems to be an unrelated development, ORI has managed to draw the ire of Sen. Charles Grassley, who has been among the staunchest watchdogs over federal research integrity.

According to the Des Moines Register, the Iowa Republican

Continue reading Senator “unsatisfied” with ORI’s response on recovery of tainted grant money

So what happened after Paul Brookes was forced to shut down Science-Fraud.org?

Paul Brookes, via URMC
Paul Brookes, via URMC

Retraction Watch readers will likely be familiar with the story of Paul Brookes, the University of Rochester researcher whose identity as the person behind Science-Fraud.org was revealed in January 2013. That revelation — and legal threats — forced Brookes to shutter Science-Fraud.org.

In a new illuminating interview in Science, Brookes discusses the legal threats he faced, how they curtailed his travel, and how his university responded, among other subjects.

The risks faced by whistleblowers are a constant thread on Retraction Watch. So did the site have an effect on his ability to do science? Continue reading So what happened after Paul Brookes was forced to shut down Science-Fraud.org?