Weekend reads: Stapel as an object lesson, peer review’s flaws, and salami slicing
It’s been another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s a sampling of scientific publishing and misconduct news from around the web:
Search Results for: salami slicing
Salami slicing in pork research leads to retractions
We get accused of grabbing at cheap puns around here, but the headline above is meant to be taken straight up. Three journals in the food sciences are retracting a trio of papers published last year on bacterial contamination in pork products because the articles used the same data sets — a classic (Platonic?) case … Continue reading Salami slicing in pork research leads to retractions
Salami slicing and heart attacks don’t mix: Duplication, lack of transparency lead to retraction
A group of French cardiology researchers have retracted a study of a potential way to rule out heart attacks, after it became clear they had used data from another study without alerting the journal. In an unusually forthright letter accompanying the retraction of “Concomitant measurement of copeptin and high-sensitivity troponin for fast and reliable rule … Continue reading Salami slicing and heart attacks don’t mix: Duplication, lack of transparency lead to retraction
“Stunned, very confused”: Two more journals push back against Impact Factor suppression
At least two more journals are fighting decisions by Clarivate — the company behind the Impact Factor — to suppress them from the 2019 list of journals assigned a metric that many rightly or wrongly consider career-making. In a letter to the editorial board of Body Image, an Elsevier journal that was one of 33 … Continue reading “Stunned, very confused”: Two more journals push back against Impact Factor suppression
A researcher with 30 retractions and counting: The whistleblower speaks
Retraction Watch readers who have been following our coverage of retractions by Ali Nazari may have noticed that an anonymous whistleblower was the person who flagged the issues for journals and publishers. That whistleblower uses the pseudonym Artemisia Stricta, and we’re pleased to present a guest post written by him or her. Something is seriously … Continue reading A researcher with 30 retractions and counting: The whistleblower speaks
Weekend reads: Tenured professor in Illinois fired; should journals publish CRISPR babies paper?; retracted vaccine-autism paper reappears
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 a retraction for a prominent psychologist at Cornell, more … Continue reading Weekend reads: Tenured professor in Illinois fired; should journals publish CRISPR babies paper?; retracted vaccine-autism paper reappears
Retraction Watch Database User Guide Appendix B: Reasons
Reason Description Author Unresponsive Author(s) lack of communication after prior contact by Journal, Publisher or other original Authors Bias Issues or Lack of Balance Failure to maintain objectivity in the presentation or analysis of information Breach of Policy by Author A violation of the Journal, Publisher or Institutional accepted practices by the author Breach of … Continue reading Retraction Watch Database User Guide Appendix B: Reasons
Weekend reads: An article on a controversial topic just disappears; mass resignations from a nutrition journal; the likely mistaken history of the vibrator
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. This week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of happiness, an apology from a journal, and … Continue reading Weekend reads: An article on a controversial topic just disappears; mass resignations from a nutrition journal; the likely mistaken history of the vibrator
Weekend reads: A new plagiarism euphemism; how Photoshop abuse destroys science; bias against women authors
The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at what happens to authors when a journal is delisted, a reminder of how hard it is to figure out whether a paper has been retracted, and a survey on how common plagiarism is in economics. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
“Ethical shades of gray:” 90% of researchers in new health field admit to questionable practices
It’s always interesting to know how many researchers in any given field engage in so-called questionable research practices that don’t rise to the level of out-and-out fraud: honorary authorship, citing articles they don’t read, choosing reference lists that would please editors or reviewers, for instance. And when the researchers work in a field with potential … Continue reading “Ethical shades of gray:” 90% of researchers in new health field admit to questionable practices