Category: by subject

Plant Science retracts paper for reused data, forged authorship

Moez Smiri, a graduate student in a Tunisian-French laboratory collaboration, clearly needed publications on his CV. But we wouldn’t recommend his solution to the problem.

Smiri used cut-and-paste data (his own, to be fair) to write a flurry of manuscripts that he sent around to a variety of journals, most of them deeply obscure. And, for a little gravitas, he also added the names of several co-authors — without their knowledge.

The result, from Plant Science: Continue reading Plant Science retracts paper for reused data, forged authorship

New retractions of diabetes, cardiovascular papers from Japan involve repeat use of figures

At least four retractions have appeared involving the work of a group of Japanese researchers who appear to have reused figures — and doctored them — in multiple manuscripts.

The authors, led by Yoshiyuki Hattori, of Dokkyo University School of Medicine in Mibu (whose motto, by the way, is “where character is developed through learning” a reader points out that we had the wrong Dokkyo initially), published the same figure twice, and in the same year, in the Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Biochimica et Biophysica Acta.

Here’s a retraction notice from the JCP: Continue reading New retractions of diabetes, cardiovascular papers from Japan involve repeat use of figures

Plagiarism in Indian Journal of Dermatology earns Tunisian authors a 5-year submission ban

The Indian Journal of Dermatology has banned a group of Tunisian researchers from publishing in the journal after the authors were found to have plagiarized. According to a retraction notice that ran on the journal’s site in May:  Continue reading Plagiarism in Indian Journal of Dermatology earns Tunisian authors a 5-year submission ban

Ties that don’t bind: Group retracts parathyroid hormone crystallography paper

The authors of a 2008 paper alleging to have described how a particular protein binds to the parathyroid hormone have retracted it. The paper, “Structure of the Parathyroid Hormone Receptor C Terminus Bound to the G-Protein Dimer Gβ12,” has been cited 12 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. According to the notice: Continue reading Ties that don’t bind: Group retracts parathyroid hormone crystallography paper

Duplicate submission from 2002 in American Journal of Psychiatry earns an Expression of Concern

The American Journal of Psychiatry has issued an Expression of Concern about a 2003 paper that was apparently simultaneously submitted to a German-language journal. According to the notice in the August 2011 issue of the journal (link added): Continue reading Duplicate submission from 2002 in American Journal of Psychiatry earns an Expression of Concern

Following investigation, FASEB Journal retracts paper after agreeing to run a correction

A contested retraction has punctuated the complicated saga of a 2003 paper in the FASEB Journal. (FASEB stands for the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.)

A retraction notice for the paper, “Molecular analysis of Nogo expression in the hippocampus during development and following lesion and seizure,” appeared in mid-June: Continue reading Following investigation, FASEB Journal retracts paper after agreeing to run a correction

Is it time for a Retraction Index?

We often hear — with data to back the statement — that top-tier journals, ranked by impact factor, retract more papers than lower-tier journals. For example, when Murat Cokol and colleagues compared journals’ retraction numbers in EMBO Reports in 2007, as Nature noted in its coverage of that study (h/t Richard van Noorden):

Journals with high impact factors retract more papers, and low-impact journals are more likely not to retract them, the study finds. It also suggests that high- and low-impact journals differ little in detecting flawed articles before they are published.

One thing you notice when you look at Cokol et al’s plots is that although their models seem to take retractions “per capita” — in other words per study published — into account, they don’t report those figures.

Enter a paper published this week in Infection and Immunity (IAI) by Ferric Fang and Arturo Casadevall, “Retracted Science and the Retraction Index.” Continue reading Is it time for a Retraction Index?

A quick Physical Review Letters retraction after author realizes analysis was “performed incorrectly”

One of the authors of a paper in Physical Review Letters has withdrawn it, after someone pointed out an error.

The paper, “Coulomb Forces on DNA Polymers in Charged Fluidic Nanoslits,” was written by Brown University’s Derek Stein and one of his graduate students, Yongqiang Ren. It was published in February of this year, and the retraction ran on July 20.

The notice is forthright: Continue reading A quick Physical Review Letters retraction after author realizes analysis was “performed incorrectly”

Cal Poly Pomona education researcher leaves post after rampant plagiarism is revealed

In late June, we wrote about a case of wholesale plagiarism involving an education researcher in California, Thienhuong N. Hoang. Our post prompted a flurry of emails from readers cluing us in to other cases in which Hoang, of California State Polytechnic University in Pomona, had lifted essentially entire articles from other scholars and changed little, if anything, but the author information.

For example, Hoang’s “‘The Contributions of Teachers’ Credentialing Routes and Experience Levels on Classroom Management,” in the January 2009 issue of the International Journal of Instruction, was the same, nearly word-for-word, as the work of two other authors, “Exploring the relationship between certification sources, experience levels, and classroom management orientations of classroom teachers,” published in Teaching and Teacher Education in 2007.

The International Journal of Instruction has removed the article from its archive and placed this announcement on its site: Continue reading Cal Poly Pomona education researcher leaves post after rampant plagiarism is revealed

Two papers to be retracted after ORI finds misconduct by Boston University cancer researcher

courtesy Nature Publishing Group

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has found that a Boston University cancer researcher made up experiments reported in two papers funded by National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health grants. According to the ORI notice:

Sheng Wang, PhD, Boston University School of Medicine Cancer Research Center: Based on the Respondent’s acceptance of ORI’s research misconduct findings, ORI found that Dr. Sheng Wang, who has been an Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine Cancer Research Center (BUSM), engaged in research misconduct in research supported by National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), grants R01 CA102940 and R01 CA101992.

The two papers were: Continue reading Two papers to be retracted after ORI finds misconduct by Boston University cancer researcher