Citation manipulation: Journal retracts paper because author boosted references to a journal he edits

jpdcA group of researchers have lost a paper in a computer science journal because they were apparently using its references to help the impact factor of a different journal that one of them edits.

Here’s the notice for “Impacts of sensor node distributions on coverage in sensor networks,” a paper first published in 2011 and cited four times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Continue reading Citation manipulation: Journal retracts paper because author boosted references to a journal he edits

DMCA notice forces removal of post critical of author who threatened to sue Retraction Watch

A blog post at another site that picked up on our coverage of Benjamin Jacob Hayempour, the researcher who has two retractions and has threatened to sue us, has been removed following a Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice.

As Andrew Oh-Willkie, the blogger, writes in an account of the incident: Continue reading DMCA notice forces removal of post critical of author who threatened to sue Retraction Watch

Weekend reads: One researcher resents “cyberbullying” while another wishes peer reviewers would spank him

booksAnother busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was going on around the web in scientific publishing and related issues:

Biotech company retracts Parkinson’s treatment study after “possible deviation from protocol”

LCTLiving Cell Technologies (LCT), a biotech company headquartered in Australia, has retracted a 2011 paper purporting to show that their product reversed Parkinson’s symptoms in rats after “being unable to reconfirm their reported results and a possible deviation from the protocol.”

LCT is developing NTCELL, which, according to their site: Continue reading Biotech company retracts Parkinson’s treatment study after “possible deviation from protocol”

Science hasn’t retracted paper that university, NSF investigators wanted withdrawn

Stefan Franzen, via NCSU
Stefan Franzen, via NCSU

On Saturday, we highlighted a great two-part series by Joseph Neff of the News & Observer diving into the story of “Stefan Franzen, a chemistry professor at North Carolina State University who has been trying unsuccessfully to correct the scientific record.” Today, that series became a three-part series, with a new story revealing that an investigation by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) had found “reckless” falsification in the work in question.

One of the key papers in the controversy was published by Lina A. Gugliotti, Daniel L. Feldheim, and Bruce E. Eaton in Science in 2004 and cited 125 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. (Eaton is now at the University of Colorado at Boulder.) In 2011, Nature reported on the situation: Continue reading Science hasn’t retracted paper that university, NSF investigators wanted withdrawn

Heads up: “Borrowing” your student’s work will earn you a partial retraction — and a five-year publishing ban

jeailWe have a curious case for the “avoiding the p word” files from the Journal of East Asia & International Law.

The paper in question, “Border Enforcement of Plant Variety Rights: A Comparison between Japan and Taiwan,” was written by Shun-liang Hsu and appeared in the Spring 2012 issue of the journal. Here are the first two pages.

The notice is quite detailed. It begins with the allegations against Hsu: Continue reading Heads up: “Borrowing” your student’s work will earn you a partial retraction — and a five-year publishing ban

Where’s the line between scientific post-publication peer review critiques and libel?

Mann4
Michael Mann, via Wikimedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mann4.jpg

One of the issues that comes up frequently when we’re moderating comments here on Retraction Watch is the distinction between “I think these images look strange” and “this researcher committed fraud.” That’s a pretty important distinction, because potentially actionable cases of libel live somewhere in between, probably closer to the latter — as Paul Brookes found out the hard way last year when Science-Fraud.org was shuttered by legal threats.

We may have some new legal precedent to follow on the matter soon, it turns out. Climate scientist Michael Mann sued The National Review in 2012 after the conservative magazine published a Competitive Enterprise Institute statement as follows: Continue reading Where’s the line between scientific post-publication peer review critiques and libel?

A rating system for retractions? How various journals stack up

publications-logoHere at Retraction Watch, we judge retraction notices every day. We even have a category called “unhelpful retraction notices.”

But we haven’t systematically analyzed those notices, so lucky for us, a group of academics at Vanderbilt decided to. In a new paper published in a special issue of Publications — an issue whose editor, Grant Steen, put out a call for papers for here on Retraction Watch — Emma Bilbrey, Natalie O’Dell, and Jonathan Creamer explain: Continue reading A rating system for retractions? How various journals stack up

Weekend reads: Trying unsuccessfully to correct the scientific record; drug company funding and research

booksThere were lots of pieces about scientific misconduct, publishing, and related issues posted around the web this week, so without further ado: Continue reading Weekend reads: Trying unsuccessfully to correct the scientific record; drug company funding and research

Kidney researcher in Switzerland who lost professorship for data manipulation loses two papers

jasnA kidney researcher in Switzerland was lost his professorship in October for manipulating data has retracted two papers.

Pascale Meier left CHUV and University of Lausanne last fall, and this week agreed to leave his clinical position at Valais Hospital after the hospital found “irregularities in the management of nephrology department and hemodialysis funds,” the Swiss media is reporting.

And yesterday, two retractions appeared in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. Here’s the notice (sadly, behind a paywall) [see update at end of post]: Continue reading Kidney researcher in Switzerland who lost professorship for data manipulation loses two papers