The title of this post is the title of a new commentary in Administrative Science Quarterly by Gerald Davis of the University of Michigan. Its abstract:
Continue reading “Why Do We Still Have Journals?”
Author: Ivan Oransky
Retraction appears for former federal contractor who faked data
In December, we reported on the case of Timothy Sheehy, a former government contractor who was found to have faked results. ORI found that Sheehy
fabricated the quantitative and qualitative data for RNA and DNA purportedly extracted from 900 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) colorectal tissue samples presented in Table 1 of the CEBP paper and falsely reported successful methodology to simultaneously recover nucleic acids from FFPE tissue specimens, when neither the extractions nor analyses of the FFPE samples were done. Thus, the main conclusions of the CEBP paper are based on fabricated data and are false.
Sheehy agreed to ask that one of his papers be retracted. The retraction notice has appeared: Continue reading Retraction appears for former federal contractor who faked data
New Frontiers: Marc Hauser back publishing in scientific literature
Marc Hauser, the psychology researcher who resigned from Harvard and was found by the Office of Research Integrity to have committed misconduct, has published two new papers.
Both papers appear in Frontiers in Psychology, the journal whose retraction of a controversial paper on conspiracy ideation and climate skepticism was, by the editors’ own admission, handled badly.
Here’s the abstract to “The mystery of language evolution:”
Continue reading New Frontiers: Marc Hauser back publishing in scientific literature
Retractions 3 and 4 appear for researcher facing criminal probe; OSU co-author won’t face inquiry
Alfredo Fusco, a cancer researcher in Italy who is facing a criminal investigation for fraud, has had two more papers retracted.
Weekend reads: Retraction Watch on NPR; “hysteria” over replication; when a paywall might be a good thing
It’s been another busy week at Retraction Watch, mostly because of the unfolding Jens Förster story. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: Retraction Watch on NPR; “hysteria” over replication; when a paywall might be a good thing
Robot paper retracted for stealing from doctoral thesis
The authors of a paper in the International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems have lost it after it became clear that they’d lifted most of it from a PhD thesis.
Here’s the notice: Continue reading Robot paper retracted for stealing from doctoral thesis
University of Queensland investigation leads to third retraction
A duo of former University of Queensland researchers have had a third article retracted following an investigation into 92 papers.
In September, Bruce Murdoch and Caroline Barwood had a paper in the European Journal of Neurology retracted. Earlier this month, the same happened to a paper in Aphasiology.
The retraction announced by the university today is for a 2013 paper in the International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology.
Here’s the notice, which is brief and behind a paywall: Continue reading University of Queensland investigation leads to third retraction
University of Maryland researchers notch second retraction
Two researchers at the University of Maryland who retracted a paper earlier this year for a duplicated figure have withdrawn another, this time for unknown reasons.
The Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) paper has been cited 16 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.
Here’s the notice, for “Hsp90 Interaction with INrf2(Keap1) Mediates Stress-induced Nrf2 Activation,” which is unfortunately a return to the JBC’s opacity: Continue reading University of Maryland researchers notch second retraction
Weekend reads: Self-plagiarism and moral panic; sexism in science; peer review under scrutiny
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, which kicked off with our announcement that we’re hiring a paid intern. Here’s what was happening elsewhere around the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: Self-plagiarism and moral panic; sexism in science; peer review under scrutiny
Ethics training paper retracted because data couldn’t be shared
A group of authors at the University of Oklahoma have retracted a 2013 paper on ethics training after the university found that the data they used couldn’t be shared publicly.
Here’s the notice for “Improving Case-Based Ethics Training: How Modeling Behaviors and Forecasting Influence Effectiveness:” Continue reading Ethics training paper retracted because data couldn’t be shared