A recent issue of Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology (CREST) adds a new euphemism for plagiarism to our rapidly growing list.
There are two retractions in the issue of the Taylor & Francis journal. One is for “Remediation of Heavy Metal Contaminated Soils: An Overview of Site Remediation Techniques,” by a group from Portugal: Continue reading A new plagiarism euphemism: “language from already published sources without using proper citation methods”
Sam Lee, a Harvard biologist who had two mega-corrections published last year, has retracted a paper in Molecular Cell because some of the figures were “inappropriately assembled.”
Here’s the notice for “GAMT, a p53-Inducible Modulator of Apoptosis, Is Critical for the Adaptive Response to Nutrient Stress:” Continue reading Retraction appears for Harvard scientist who had two mega-corrections last year
It would be difficult to read the recent scientific literature on retractions and miss Grant Steen’s contributions. Retraction Watch readers are no doubt familiar with his work by this point, and if they’re not, we’d recommend spending some time with it. The journal Publications — an MDPI title — has asked him to guest-edit a special issue on scientific misconduct, and Steen asked us to get the word out, so we’re happy to post this introduction from him: Continue reading Journal to feature special issue on scientific misconduct, seeks submissions
The Journal of Prosthodontics has retracted a 2006 paper by a pair of Saudi researchers and given them a pass because of an alleged lack of grasp of English — and, we’d add, publishing ethics.
The article, titled “Effect of Chemical Disinfectants and Repair Materials on the Transverse Strength of Repaired Heat-Polymerized Acrylic Resin,” was written by Ayman Ellakwa and Ali El-Sheikh, from institutions in Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
The paper’s abstract stated: Continue reading Dental journal gives plenty to chew on in retraction of resin paper
The authors of a 2013 paper in the journal Foods which sounded alarms about the concentrations of pesticides in vegetables and other commercial crops have pulled the article, citing an insurmountable mistake. To wit: the levels of pesticides they reported were, in fact, not what the data really showed.
The article, titled “Health risk assessment of pesticide residues via dietary intake of market vegetables from Dhaka, Bangladesh,” came from a group from that country and Australia. Continue reading Pesticide paper retracted for “major errors”
Perhaps what Garrison Keillor says about people is also true of scientific papers:
Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.
There’s been another retraction in social psychology, but before you lump it together with the field’s problem children — read: Diederik Stapel — it seems to be an example of researchers coming forward about an honest error.
Here’s the notice for “The Motivated Self: Self-Affirmation and the Better-Than-Average Effect,” originally published last year in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin: Continue reading Paper on “better-than-average effect” retracted for being, well, worse than average
In February, we brought you the story of Konstantin Meyl, a
professor who claims to have developed “a self-consistent field theory which is used to derive at all known interactions of the potential vortex”
At the time, one of Meyl’s papers — which a reviewer had called “way out there” — had just been retracted, for duplication. Now a second paper — among the works from which the first retracted paper had drawn — has been retracted.
Here’s the notice from the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling (which is buried in a footnote at the bottom of the paper): Continue reading Author of “way out there” paper merging physics and biology has second paper retracted
If it seems that we write “irony alert” often, well, can you blame us? The Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries (we’ll call it JLPPI for short) has retracted a paper it published earlier this year for plagiarism from multiple sources.
The article, “FTA vs. Tripod-Beta, which seems better for the analysis of major accidents in process industries?” was written by two occupational health researchers at Hamadan University of Medical Sciences in Iran. According to the abstract:
Continue reading Irony alert: Authors lose paper in loss prevention journal for plagiarism
Irony alert: If you’re going to publish a paper on the importance of hearing from many voice in a debate, better make sure every voice is heard.
Here’s a case where some got muted.
Third World Quarterly, a Taylor & Francis title, has retracted a paper it published recently because only one of the authors — a co-editor of the special issue in which the paper appeared — was listed on the final article. Here’s the retraction notice, which explains the publisher’s mishap: Continue reading E pluribus unum (oops!) forces retraction of social justice article
In what may be a first, a researcher in Turkey has withdrawn a paper because the patients whose cases she described wthdrew their consent after it was published.
Here’s the notice, from Allergy, Asthma, & Clinical Immunology, of a paper titled “Severe contact dermatitis due to camomile: a common complementary remedy with potential sensitization risks:” Continue reading Camomile allergy case report retracted after patients withdraw consent post-publication