Milena Penkowa, the Danish neuroscientist who resigned from the University of Copenhagen in December 2010 amid suspicions of misconduct, has had another paper retracted.
The new retraction appears in Experimental Neurology. Here’s the notice for “M-CSF deficiency leads to reduced metallothioneins I and II expression and increased tissue damage in the brain stem after 6-aminonicotinamide treatment”: Continue reading Penkowa notches fourth retraction, in Experimental Neurology
The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has sanctioned an assistant professor of dermatology at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland for plagiarizing from a grant application she was reviewing — which feels like a scientific version of insider trading — and a number of published papers.
According to the ORI’s findings, Pratima Karnik Continue reading Case Western dermatology department hit with second ORI sanction within 6 months
Five months after the Office of Research Integrity announced they had found evidence of misconduct by Adam Savine, a former Washington University graduate student in neuroscience, another journal has published a retraction of his work.
Here’s the retraction notice in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General for “A characterization of individual differences in prospective memory monitoring using the Complex Ongoing Serial Task”:
Continue reading Third retraction appears for former Wash U neuroscience grad student who committed misconduct
Two of three authors in Argentina of a 2002 paper purporting to show evidence of bird-like fossil footprints from the Late Triassic age have retracted it after subsequent research suggested their estimates were off.
Here’s the notice for “Bird-like fossil footprints from the Late Triassic:” Continue reading Authors retract Nature paper on bird-like footprints thought to date to Late Triassic
It was the last study ever published from prominent scientist Gerd Maul’s lab. And now it’s been retracted.
Maul was a highly cited cell biologist, with 30 papers cited at least 100 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. He was also a well-known sculptor. When he died in 2010, he had a paper under submission at Cancer Research, which was published late that year.
This year, however, his co-authors found problems with the study. And as the notice — one of the most detailed we’ve ever seen — explains: Continue reading A sad postscript: Paper by deceased researcher retracted
Since last May, we’ve been reporting on a case at the University of Utah involving two retractions and two corrections. When the story first broke, the lab blamed a former worker for inappropriately removing data from the premises, and the university has been investigating. Last month, we reported that Ivana De Domenico, the junior faculty member who was first author on those papers, had left the university, and that senior author Jerry Kaplan had retired.
But the problems went beyond the four papers we reported on, as the Salt Lake Tribune reported on Friday. In a 9-page report provided to the Tribune, the panel overseeing the investigation details its examination of 11 papers. This is the first of six findings: Continue reading University of Utah finds former faculty member guilty of misconduct because of “reckless disregard”
The University of São Paulo and Brazil’s National Council of Technological and Scientific Development funding agency (CNPq) have cleared a researcher of fraud following a six-month investigation.
The CNPq’s Commission on Integrity in Scientific Activity noted, however, that “there was failure to exercise rigor in the conduct and dissemination of results [in Rui Curi’s work], essential to quality research.” Continue reading University, funding agency clear researcher Rui Curi of fraud charges
Diederik Stapel is up to 54 retractions.
Here’s the notice from Self and Identity: Continue reading Measure by measure: Diederik Stapel count rises again, to 54
Our list of ways that authors and editors find to dance around writing the word “plagiarism” seems to grow longer by the week. Today, we can add “administrative error” to that collection of euphemisms, thanks to authors from South Africa and the editors of an education journal.
Here’s the notice for “Development studies students as constructors of classroom pedagogy in practice: Observed classroom dynamics from the Kingdom of Lesotho,” published in Educational Research in October 2010: Continue reading That’s not plagiarism, it’s an “administrative error”
One of the things we try to do here at Retraction Watch is see what happens to researchers who’ve had to retract papers. There’s Naoki Mori, who lost his job because of extensive image manipulation but sued successfully to get it back, for example.
Now, courtesy of the Oakland Press, we have the story of two academics at Oakland University in Michigan who were promoted after being forced to retract two papers for duplication — and earning a ban on publishing in one society’s journals. Continue reading What happens to researchers who publish duplicated papers? At one university, they’re promoted