Ethics, authorship concerns sink homeopathy paper by researchers arrested last year

For a host of reasons, a journal has retracted a paper co-authored by a researcher who reportedly once faced charges of practicing medicine without proper qualifications. According to the retraction notice for “Psorinum Therapy in Treating Stomach, Gall Bladder, Pancreatic, and Liver Cancers: A Prospective Clinical Study,” published Dec. 8, 2010 in Evidence-Based Complementary and … Continue reading Ethics, authorship concerns sink homeopathy paper by researchers arrested last year

The RW Week In Review: Anti-gay bias, an authorship lawsuit; misconduct in industry vs. academia

We’ve been having some technical issues with the site, which may have kept some readers from accessing our content this week. We think we’ve figured out what was wrong, and fixed it, but in the meantime here’s what we were up to this week, in case you missed it:

Journal retracts note of concern after court settles authorship dispute

A journal has retracted a warning posted to a paper involved in an authorship dispute, after the issue was resolved in a court case. In an editorial published Jan. 10, editors at the journal Molecules wrote that they were removing the expression of concern for “Helleborus purpurascens—Amino Acid and Peptide Analysis Linked to the Chemical … Continue reading Journal retracts note of concern after court settles authorship dispute

“The most terrible experience of my life:” Authorship dispute leads to lawsuit

A journal has retracted a 2014 paper because of an authorship dispute that became the subject of litigation. Last year, the Allegheny Health Network in Pittsburgh requested the paper be retracted to resolve the dispute. The Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials retracted the paper in October. According to the retraction notice, the principal … Continue reading “The most terrible experience of my life:” Authorship dispute leads to lawsuit

Weekend reads: Systemic fraud in China; science without journals; authorship rules decay

The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper that had been called “anti-vaccine pseudoscience,” a retraction following threats of violence against an editor, and an editorial board member’s resignation over how a journal handled a case of plagiarism. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Authorship for sale: Some journals willing to add authors to papers they didn’t write

Got $300? Then you can be added as an author to a paper — even if you had no role in the research. That’s right — some journals are willing to add authors to papers they didn’t write, often for a fee. This realization comes from one of the many sting experiments we’ve witnessed over … Continue reading Authorship for sale: Some journals willing to add authors to papers they didn’t write

Weekend reads: An NIH grant scam; are calls for retraction useful?; how to end honorary authorship

The week at Retraction Watch featured the revocation of a PhD, a questionable way to boost university rankings, and a look at what editors should do when a researcher known to have committed misconduct submits a new manuscript. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Unintended consequences: How authorship guidelines destroyed a relationship

It started as a simple email exchange over authorship. But it angered one researcher so much that it ended a 20-year collaboration. In January 2017, a chemist based in Mexico had finished writing a paper describing the structure of a molecule. Sylvain Bernès, at the Instituto de Física Luis Rivera Terrazas, asked his co-author—the head … Continue reading Unintended consequences: How authorship guidelines destroyed a relationship

Weekend reads: Citation cartels; less authorship credit for women; theft by peer reviewers

The week at Retraction Watch featured a discussion of whether peer reviewers should replicate experiments, and a look at whether social psychology really has a retraction problem. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

A new way to fake authorship: Submit under a prominent name, then say it was a mistake

Recently, the editors of a journal about management science received a submission from a prominent Dutch economist. But something didn’t feel right about it. For one, the author submitted the paper using a Yahoo email address. So the editors contacted the author via his institutional email; immediately, the researcher denied having submitted the paper — … Continue reading A new way to fake authorship: Submit under a prominent name, then say it was a mistake