Category: by publisher

Dispute over data rights forces retraction of obesity paper

bmcresnotesA group of researchers in South Africa has lost their 2012 article in BMC Research Notes after one of the author’s institutions evidently pulled rank and sought to claim the data as its own.

The article, “Association of body weight and physical activity with blood pressure in a rural population in the Dikgale village of Limpopo Province in South Africa,” appeared last February. Its first author was Seth Mkhonto, who listed two affiliations, the Human Sciences Research Council, in Pretoria, and the University of the Limpopo.

But the latter institution seems not to have given Mkhonto approval to publish the data — a rather strange state of affairs given the whole “publish or perish” ethos of academia.

According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Dispute over data rights forces retraction of obesity paper

Sensing a pattern? Pattern Recognition Letters misses rampant plagiarism in modeling paper

prlcoverIt really isn’t fair to pick on Pattern Recognition Letters, but, well, if the shoe fits…

We had fun at the expense of the journal the last time we found that a duplicate publication had escaped the editors. This time, plagiarism is to blame.

A group of authors from the Institute of Automation at the Chinese Academy of Sciences published, then promptly lost, their September 2013 article in PRL titled “Model-based 3D tracking of an articulated hand from single depth images.”

The abstract: Continue reading Sensing a pattern? Pattern Recognition Letters misses rampant plagiarism in modeling paper

Analyze this! Analytical Letters retracts chemistry paper for authorship misdirection

anal lettersAnalytical Letters has retracted a 2011 article by a chemistry researcher at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio, who seems to have avoided giving credit where credit was due.

The article, “Conducting Polymer Matrix Poly(2,2′-bithiophene) Mercury Metal Incorporation,” was written (so readers were told) by Suzanne Lunsford.

Here’s how the retraction notice explains it: Continue reading Analyze this! Analytical Letters retracts chemistry paper for authorship misdirection

Social work researchers lose paper for misuse of data

jhbseIrony alert: If you’re going to publish in the Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, you’d better be able to play well with others.

Not so, it seems, with a certain Darrel Montero. Montero, an associate professor in the School of Social Work at Arizona State University, and his colleagues have lost their 2012 paper in the journal for what appears to be a case of data theft.

As the retraction notice explains:

Continue reading Social work researchers lose paper for misuse of data

Nursing journal pulls Novo Nordisk growth hormone paper over data provenance

j peds nursingThe Journal of Pediatric Nursing has retracted a 2013 article (meeting abstract, really) on growth hormone after the drug company that employed the authors cried “take it back.”

The research appears to have been presented at a meeting of the Pediatric Endocrinology Nursing Society, and looked at inefficiency in the use of devices for administering growth hormone.  All but one of the authors is listed as working for Novo Nordisk, an international pharmaceutical firm.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Nursing journal pulls Novo Nordisk growth hormone paper over data provenance

“Ambiguities in the presentation of some of the data” lead to an ambiguous retraction notice

brainSometimes, authors and journals editors seem to think a bit of mystery is a good thing. Take a recent retraction in Brain.

Here’s the  notice for “Selective impairment of hand mental rotation in patients with focal hand dystonia:” Continue reading “Ambiguities in the presentation of some of the data” lead to an ambiguous retraction notice

Plagiarism leads to retraction of conduction paper

physica bPhysica B: Condensed Matter has retracted a 2013 paper by a group from Morocco and France for, well, inappropriate condensation of printed matter.

The article, “Granular and intergranular conduction in La1.32Sr1.68Mn2O7 layered manganite system,” came mostly from a team of physicists at  University Ibn Zohr, and appeared in June.

According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Plagiarism leads to retraction of conduction paper

Plant journal withdraws paper — or does it?

mol plantThe temporary withdrawal of a Molecular Plant paper had us scratching our heads, but the issue seems to be explained by a glitch.

If you click on this version of “Application of the CRISPR–Cas System for Efficient Genome Engineering in Plants” (subscription required), you see this:

This paper has been withdrawn pending a decision by the Editorial Board

But that page also says that the latest version of the paper was published on October 3. Clicking on that version sends you to the paper, which begins: Continue reading Plant journal withdraws paper — or does it?

Scientific American faces firestorm after removing blog post about scientist being called a whore

dnlee
Danielle Lee, via Twitter

We tend to stick to retractions in the peer-reviewed literature here at Retraction Watch, although we’ve made exceptions. Today’s post seemed like a good reason to make another exception, because while Nature Publishing Group-owned Scientific American is not a peer-reviewed journal, the science blogosphere and Twitter are lighting up this weekend with strong reactions to the magazine’s removal of a blog post by biologist Danielle Lee.

The incident was first noted by Dr. Rubidium, who wrote yesterday:

Scientist and science communicator @DNLee5 declined an offer to blog for free from biology-online.org and got called a ‘whore’.  @DNLee5 posted a thoughtful response on her Scientific American‘s blog ’The Urban Scientist‘.  A short time later, her response vanished…

(You can read Lee’s original post on Dr. Isis’s blog.)

Yesterday morning, Scientific American editor-in-chief Mariette DiChristina responded on Twitter: Continue reading Scientific American faces firestorm after removing blog post about scientist being called a whore

Stem cell scientist says data in retracted paper “is not falsified or fabricated”

Feuer_detail
Gerold Feuer, via Upstate

On Wednesday, we brought you the story of a retraction by Gerold Feuer, a State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical Center stem cell scientist whom the university had found to have misused grants. He was suspended, but successfully fought that action. We had asked Feuer for comment at that time, and he has now responded:

SUNY Upstate Medical University’s decision to widely publicize the recent decision by the journal Stem Cells to retract an article from my laboratory is a vindictive and retaliatory campaign to defame my scientific credentials in the press and to my scientific colleagues.

I unequivocally state that the data in all published manuscripts is valid and sound and is not falsified or fabricated. SUNY UMU unilaterally requested a retraction from Stem Cells, despite the fact that the federal Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has not yet ruled on these allegations. It is not surprising that UMU has decided to publicize this retraction in a public forum as a second attempt to force me from my tenured faculty position and circumvent decision of the employment arbitrator and the New York Supreme Court.

To date SUNY UMU has refused to abide by the arbitrator’s “binding” decision to reinstate my faculty position and has failed to pay proper back-wages. The arbitrator evaluated operations of my spin-off company, Humurine Technologies, and stated: Continue reading Stem cell scientist says data in retracted paper “is not falsified or fabricated”