Search Results for: David Anderson

Frankincense extract paper is 30th retracted by former MD Anderson researcher who once threatened to sue Retraction Watch

A cancer researcher in Texas who once threatened to sue Retraction Watch is up to 30 retractions, the latest involving a 2011 article which earned a correction the following year.  The paper, “Boswellic Acid Suppresses Growth and Metastasis of Human Pancreatic Tumors in an Orthotopic Nude Mouse Model through Modulation of Multiple Targets,” came from … Continue reading Frankincense extract paper is 30th retracted by former MD Anderson researcher who once threatened to sue Retraction Watch

Two more retractions bring total to 9 for neuroscience duo

After the first author admitted to fraud, his colleagues have retracted a 2013 paper in the Journal of Neuroscience, as well as a 2015 book chapter about working memory. The retractions come as part of a backstory of pulled papers authored by psychologist Edward Awh and his former graduate student David Anderson when he was based at the University … Continue reading Two more retractions bring total to 9 for neuroscience duo

More retractions bring total to 7 for neuroscience pair, 2 more pending

Authors have retracted two papers about visual perception and working memory from the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, after the first author admitted to falsifying or fabricating data in four other papers. The authors have requested another two retractions, as well, which will bring the total for Edward Awh and his former graduate student David Anderson to nine retractions. (Earlier … Continue reading More retractions bring total to 7 for neuroscience pair, 2 more pending

4th ORI-flagged paper by Oregon student is retracted

The last of four papers containing data falsified by University of Oregon neuroscience student David Anderson has been retracted. When the Office of Research Integrity report flagging the papers came out in July, Anderson told us he “made an error in judgment,” and took “full responsibility” for the misconduct. The newly retracted paper, “A common discrete resource for visual working memory and visual search,” … Continue reading 4th ORI-flagged paper by Oregon student is retracted

Three retractions for Oregon neuroscience student investigated by ORI

Journals have retracted three out of the four papers flagged by the Office of Research Integrity during its investigation of a University of Oregon neuroscience student, David Anderson. Last month, when we first reported on the case, Anderson told us that he “made an error in judgment,” and took “full responsibility.” Two of the retraction notes say that Anderson … Continue reading Three retractions for Oregon neuroscience student investigated by ORI

Oregon grad student admits to faking data in four neuroscience papers

A graduate student at the University of Oregon in Eugene has admitted to faking data that appeared in four published papers in the field of visual working memory, according to the Office of Research Integrity. David Anderson’s supervisor at the time was Edward Awh, who has since moved to the University of Chicago. Anderson told Retraction Watch … Continue reading Oregon grad student admits to faking data in four neuroscience papers

How to avoid retractions for plagiarism: Advice from a radiology journal editor (and arXiv)

Earlier this month, we highlighted the concerns of the editors of the ACS Nano journal about self-plagiarism, otherwise known as duplication. The editor of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR) — that’s radiology, for the uninitiated — has similar concerns, but about plagiarism of others’ work. In an editorial published in the journal’s January issue, Thomas Berquist notes: Preliminary data including … Continue reading How to avoid retractions for plagiarism: Advice from a radiology journal editor (and arXiv)

Retraction Watch turns 10: A look back, and a look forward

Ten years. On Aug. 3, 2010, we published our first post on Retraction Watch. Titled, “Why write a blog about retractions?”, the welcome letter to readers outlined our hopes for the new blog. Retractions, we felt then, offered “a window into the scientific process,” as well as a source of good stories for journalists. In … Continue reading Retraction Watch turns 10: A look back, and a look forward

Weekend reads: The Trump administration gets something right about science; a journal refuses a metaphor; should journals use Nazi science?

The week at Retraction Watch featured an expression of concern following a journalist’s questions; a kind of plagiarism that software will miss; and researchers who blamed a ghostwriter for plagiarism. Here’s what was happening elsewhere.

Weekend reads: Medical device maker demands a retraction; an admission from a predatory publisher; a journal digs in and won’t retract

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 the story of two scientific sleuths who were right — … Continue reading Weekend reads: Medical device maker demands a retraction; an admission from a predatory publisher; a journal digs in and won’t retract