In 2009, Donald Williamson made what many biologists said was an extraordinary claim: The reason caterpillars become butterflies is that two different species accidentally mated with one another. As Brendan Borrell explained at the time in Scientific American: Continue reading A flying what? Symbiosis retracts paper claiming new species arise from accidental mating
Author: Ivan Oransky
Come see Retraction Watch in Berlin
Ivan is on a public panel in Berlin at 7 p.m. on Wednesday night, November 2: “Science 2.0 – More knowledge, more transparency, more quality? How Web 2.0 has changed science.”
Joining him in the discussion, which will be in English, are: Continue reading Come see Retraction Watch in Berlin
Report on pot and crime goes up in smoke as RAND retracts it
Maybe they just hallucinated it.
The RAND Corporation has retracted a study linking Los Angeles pot dispensaries to drops in crime, the Los Angeles Times reports. The problem: RAND hadn’t included data from the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). The institute tells the Times, referring to RAND researchers:
“They made mistakes,” said Debra Knopman, a Rand vice president and director of the infrastructure, safety and environment division. “What we’re wrestling with is how the mistakes went undetected.”
The report was peer-reviewed, RAND said, and retractions are uncommon: Continue reading Report on pot and crime goes up in smoke as RAND retracts it
National University of Singapore official who co-authored Melendez papers won’t be part of investigation
The Alirio Melendez case is likely to become quite complicated, as the National University of Singapore (NUS) looks into about 70 papers by the researcher whose work has already been the subject of a retraction and Expression of Concern. One such wrinkle seemed to have already surfaced when a blog called the Gigamole Diaries pointed out last week that an NUS dean apparently connected to the investigation had co-authored two papers with Melendez:
…the authorship list for Melendez papers reads almost like a Who’s Who in the medical school, and includes heads of departments, Vice Deans and prominent individuals in the office of the NUS Vice President. Interestingly Prof Barry Halliwell, who is NUS Deputy President (Research and Technology), and who has been cited as fronting the investigation into the Melendez publications is himself associated with at least 2 Melendez publications.
We checked with Halliwell, who has indeed spoken to numerous media outlets about the investigation. He tells us: Continue reading National University of Singapore official who co-authored Melendez papers won’t be part of investigation
Should journals ban researchers found guilty of fraud from publishing?
Over the past 14 months, we’ve covered several cases of retractions that were punished with publishing bans:
- Serial image manipulator Naoki Mori was slapped with one by the American Society of Microbiology (ASM) – which publishes Infection and Immunity, The Journal of Clinical Microbiology, and others
- The ASM banned another author, who plagiarized and did some not-so-legit fussing with his alleged co-authors
- The Indian Journal of Dermatology won’t accept papers by three Tunisian authors after they were found guilty of plagiarism
That led us to ask the question that’s the title of this post, as well as of our newest column for Lab Times. Continue reading Should journals ban researchers found guilty of fraud from publishing?
Remaining Zhiguo Wang retractions will be in the Journal of Cellular Physiology
We’ve been following the case of Zhiguo Wang, the former Montreal Heart Institute researcher who was forced to resign his post in early September following an investigation into his work. At the time of that announcement, two retractions of the Wang group’s papers — which we had reported on in August — had appeared. The Institute said they had requested three more.
We figured that meant a total of five, although the Institute wouldn’t say which they were. So when we found out about a third retraction, in the Journal of Cell Science, we said it was the first of the remaining three.
We were wrong. Continue reading Remaining Zhiguo Wang retractions will be in the Journal of Cellular Physiology
Concerns over language in PLoS One autism paper lead to brief withdrawal and correction
On September 28, PLoS One published a paper, “The Level and Nature of Autistic Intelligence II: What about Asperger Syndrome?”
But rather than celebrate another publication for her CV, one of the authors, Michelle Dawson, of Centre d’Excellence en Troubles Envahissants du Développement de l’Université de Montréal (CETEDUM) in Montréal, wasn’t happy. The PLoS One editors had made some changes she didn’t like. And she let everyone on Twitter know: Continue reading Concerns over language in PLoS One autism paper lead to brief withdrawal and correction
Upcoming Retraction Watch appearances: New York, St. Louis
If you’re a Retraction Watch reader in New York or St. Louis, come see Retraction Watch live. On Thursday, October 20, Ivan will be on a SONYC panel at Rockefeller University [please see update at end]. On the 25th, he’ll give a talk at the Danforth Center in St. Louis.
More info: Continue reading Upcoming Retraction Watch appearances: New York, St. Louis
Two detailed retraction notices appear in PNAS
We’ve fallen a bit behind in our coverage of retractions in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), so we wanted to call attention to two very helpful ones from recent months.
Here’s one notice, which appeared online on August 5: Continue reading Two detailed retraction notices appear in PNAS
Join Retraction Watch today for a webchat with Nature
Ivan will be joining Richard van Noorden, author of Nature‘s feature last week on retractions, for a live Q&A today at 11 a.m. Eastern (4 p.m. BST). Join us and ask questions here.
And while you have your calendars out, Ivan is part of a SONYC panel next week in New York on retractions. Get a free ticket here.