Category: physical sciences retractions

More retractions for authors who duplicated — and did their own peer review

spectroscopylettersAdd to the retraction pile for a pair of chemists in Iran who duplicated their work — and reviewed their own articles to boot.

The authors, Kobra Pourabdollah and Bahram Mokhtari, are affiliated with the Razi Chemistry Research Center in the Shahreza Branch of Islamic Azad University. In September, we reported on the retractions of three articles by the researchers in Synthesis and Reactivity in Inorganic, Metal-Organic, and Nano-Metal Chemistry.

Readers then alerted us to five other retractions in the Journal of Coordination Chemistry — although these papers did not appear (at least by the retraction notice) to have involved self-reviewing.

The duo now also has lost a 2012 article in Spectroscopy Letters: An International Journal for Rapid Communication. , which has been cited twice, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. According to the notice: Continue reading More retractions for authors who duplicated — and did their own peer review

Mathematicians have second paper retracted

inequalA group of mathematicians in Iran have had a second paper retracted, and if we may, neither of the notices adds up.

Here’s the notice: for the new paper, in the Journal of Inequalities and Applications: Continue reading Mathematicians have second paper retracted

Weekend reads: China’s scientific publishing black market, how to blow the whistle, and more

booksIt’s been a busy week here at Retraction Watch, with breaking news about hotly debated papers from Nature and about GMOs, but there have been interesting stories about retractions and scientific misconduct elsewhere, too. Here’s a sampling:
Continue reading Weekend reads: China’s scientific publishing black market, how to blow the whistle, and more

Holes in ASS as journal pulls two papers

asscoverThe journal Applied Surface Science (okay, so maybe it’s not called ASS at the home office) is retracting a pair of articles in its December issue.

The first, “Structure and mechanical properties of Ni–P electrodeposited coatings,” appeared in 2009 and was written by a group of researchers in Beijing. It has been cited nine times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. Its problem: Plagiarism. According to the retraction notice:  Continue reading Holes in ASS as journal pulls two papers

Royal Society of Chemistry apologizes for unclear retraction notice

jaasLast week, we reported on a retraction in the Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry that left us a bit puzzled. The notice referred to a problem with “the way the data was presented,” but the authors told us this was just an error picked up in proofreading, somehow after the paper had been published online.

We now have much more of the story. The Royal Society of Chemistry’s May Copsey, who edits the journal, tells Retraction Watch: Continue reading Royal Society of Chemistry apologizes for unclear retraction notice

Chemistry article retracted “due to the way data was presented”

jaasA retraction in a chemistry journal has us scratching our heads. And we’re apparently not alone — the authors are scratching theirs, too.

Here’s the notice for “Achievement of 1.4 ng detection limit of cesium with TXRF spectrometer by changing the X-ray detector and reducing noise:” Continue reading Chemistry article retracted “due to the way data was presented”

JACS retracts polymer paper over data concerns

jacsat_v135i044.inddThe Journal of the American Chemical Society has retracted a 2009 paper on ethylene polymerization after the authors said they were unable to replicate their findings.

The article, “Bimetallic Effects for Enhanced Polar Comonomer Enchainment Selectivity in Catalytic Ethylene Polymerization,”came from the lab of Tobin Marks, a highly decorated — and grant-and-royalty-generating — chemist at Northwestern University.
Continue reading JACS retracts polymer paper over data concerns

No, math prof, Google isn’t a proper literature search (and don’t plagiarize your dead mentor)

semigroupSometimes, it’s easiest and most straightforward if we just let retraction notices sink in before we comment on them.

Take this one from Semigroup Forum, signed by Chong-yih Wu of National Pingtung Institute of Commerce, Pingtung, Taiwan: Continue reading No, math prof, Google isn’t a proper literature search (and don’t plagiarize your dead mentor)

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