Author: Ivan Oransky

Giving thanks for plagiarism detection software: Catching up on retractions for the sincerest form of flattery

Today, on Thanksgiving in the U.S., Retraction Watch is taking a bit of a holiday as we dig into some turkey — not to be confused with retractions from Turkey. We’d like to give thanks for the thousands of Retraction Watch readers all over the world who’ve helped us shine a spotlight on the scientific process, warts and all.

And we imagine that journal editors around the globe are giving thanks to plagiarism detection software such as iThenticate, so today’s post is a roundup of some recent retractions for plagiarism: Continue reading Giving thanks for plagiarism detection software: Catching up on retractions for the sincerest form of flattery

What’s new is not new again: Ulrich Lichtenthaler retracts eighth paper

The list of Ulrich Lichtenthaler retractions has grown to eight.

Here’s the new notice, for “Externally commercializing technology assets: An examination of different process stages,” from the Journal of Business Venturing: Continue reading What’s new is not new again: Ulrich Lichtenthaler retracts eighth paper

ORI sanctions former University of Kentucky nutrition researcher for faking dozens of images in 10 papers

Eric J. Smart, via U Kentucky

The U.S. Office of Research Integrity has come down hard on a Eric J. Smart, an NIH-funded former University of Kentucky nutrition researcher who faked data in ten published papers and seven grant applications over the past decade.

Smart studies cholesterol, heart disease, diabetes, and high blood pressure. According to the notice in the Federal Register: Continue reading ORI sanctions former University of Kentucky nutrition researcher for faking dozens of images in 10 papers

The Nature paper that required three corrections

courtesy Nature

In baseball, it’s three strikes and you’re out. In Nature, apparently, you can stay at the plate after three swings-and-misses.

That’s what we concluded from a Corrigendum in last week’s issue, for “CD95 promotes tumour growth,” originally published in May 2010 and now corrected not once, not twice, but three times.

Here was the first Corrigendum, from March 2011: Continue reading The Nature paper that required three corrections

JBC publisher ASBMB hiring manager of publication ethics — and why Retraction Watch is cheering

We’re not generally — or ever — in the habit of running job ads here on Retraction Watch. But the purpose of this post is to highlight a new position available at the American Society for Biochemistry & Molecular Biology (ASBMB) that we think is a great opportunity and a step forward for the society.

As regular Retraction Watch readers know, we frequently beat up on one of the ASBMB’s journals, the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC), for publishing retraction notices that say simply “This article has been withdrawn by the authors.” We’re not the only ones; Ferric Fang and colleagues name-checked the journal’s policy when they wrote about factors that Continue reading JBC publisher ASBMB hiring manager of publication ethics — and why Retraction Watch is cheering

Retraction seven arrives for Ulrich Lichtenthaler

Ulrich Lichtenthaler, the management professor at the University of Mannheim who has already retracted six papers for statistical irregularities, has another retraction for his CV.

Here’s the notice, from Organization Science: Continue reading Retraction seven arrives for Ulrich Lichtenthaler

Another retraction from University of Waterloo, this time for duplication

Canada’s University of Waterloo is racking up the retractions, with one in July for plagiarism, another earlier this month for faked data from a graduate student who had her master’s degree revoked, and now a third for duplication.

Here’s the notice, for “The influence of friends, family, and older peers on smoking among elementary school students: Low-risk students in high-risk schools,” which appeared in Preventive Medicine in March 2006: Continue reading Another retraction from University of Waterloo, this time for duplication

Paper cuts? Duplication, data manipulation force retraction of study of circumcision by ring device

A group of Chinese authors studying the Shang Ring, “a device that allows professionals to perform hundreds rather than tens of” circumcisions in a day, as had to retract the paper after editors apparently figured out they had changed some dates in the paper so it wouldn’t look as though they were trying to publish it twice. Or maybe they just changed the dates for some other reason, while publishing it twice anyway — it’s not clear.

Here’s the Journal of Urology notice for “A Randomized Clinical Study of Circumcision with a Ring Device Versus Conventional Circumcision,” by Cheng Yuea and colleagues from the Medical College of Ningbo University, the Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, and Taizhou First People’s Hospital: Continue reading Paper cuts? Duplication, data manipulation force retraction of study of circumcision by ring device

Chemistry journal and author retract paper dogged by questions since its publication in 2006

A chemistry journal has retracted a 2006 paper that had knowledgeable researchers scratching their heads from the minute it was published.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Chemistry journal and author retract paper dogged by questions since its publication in 2006

Transcendental meditation paper pulled minutes before publication appears in a new journal

In June of last year, the Archives of Internal Medicine yanked a paper just 12 minutes before it was scheduled to publish, to

…allow time for review and statistical analysis of additional data not included in the original paper that the authors provided less than 24 hours before posting…

A year later, the lead author told us the paper was still under review. Now, as Larry Husten of CardioBrief reports today, it has finally been published — but in a different journal altogether: Continue reading Transcendental meditation paper pulled minutes before publication appears in a new journal