With retraction notices continuing to pour in, we like to occasionally take the opportunity to cover several at a time to keep up. We’ve compiled a handful of retractions that were all issued to papers that were published twice by at least one of the same authors — known as duplication. (Sometimes, this can be … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d: Results so nice, they’re published twice
With so many retraction notices pouring in, from time to time we compile a handful of straight-forward retractions. Once again, this list focuses on duplications — but unlike other duplications, these authors were not at fault. Rather, these retractions occurred because the publishers mistakenly published the same paper twice — the result of a transfer … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d: Results so nice, journals published them twice
As we’ve said before, with hundreds of retractions per year, there are simply too many for us to cover individually. So from time to time we’ll compile a list of retractions that appeared relatively straightforward, just for record-keeping purposes. Often, these seemingly straightforward retractions involve duplications, in which authors — accidentally or on purpose — … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d: Nice data — let’s see them again
We can’t keep up with the growing number of retraction notices, so we’ve compiled a list of recent duplications to update our records. 1. Authors don’t always intentionally duplicate their own work, of course. The first paper on our list was retracted after the authors included a figure from a previous paper by accident, according … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d (again): Do these data look familiar? They are
When our co-founders launched the site in 2010, they wondered whether there would be enough retractions to write about on a regular basis. Five+ years and three full-time staffers later, and we simply don’t have the time to cover everything that comes across our desk. In 2012, we covered a group of duplication retractions in a … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d: Meet authors who like their work so much, they publish it twice
As we’ve noted before, we generally let duplication retractions make their way to the bottom of our to-do pile, since there’s often less of an interesting story behind them, duplication is hardly the worst of publishing sins, and the notices usually tell the story. (These are often referred to — imprecisely — as “self-plagiarism.”) But … Continue reading You’ve been dupe’d: Catching up on authors who liked their work enough to use it again
In October, we noted the apparent record holder for longest time between publication and retraction: 25 years, for “Retention of the 4-pro-R hydrogen atom of mevalonate at C-2,2′ of bacterioruberin in Halobacterium halobium,” published in the Biochemical Journal in 1980 and retracted in 2005. (Although an author requested that another 52-year-old paper be retracted, it … Continue reading A new record: A retraction, 27 years later