Search Results for: opaque

Collateral damage: What effect do retractions have on scientific funding?

A new study from a group of Boston-area economists sheds some light on whether retractions have downstream effects on related fields, particularly when it comes to funding. From the abstract of the working paper, called simply “Retractions,” by  Pierre Azoulay, Jeffrey L. Furman, Joshua L. Krieger, and Fiona E. Murray: We find that scientifi c misconduct … Continue reading Collateral damage: What effect do retractions have on scientific funding?

Elsevier on Retraction Watch: “scholarly publishing is better for it”

It’s fair to say that we’ve been watching Elsevier over the past two-plus years, and we’ve also known they’ve been watching us. Last year, Tom Reller, the company’s vice president of global public relations, wrote that we “represent the new breed of science watchdog that is able to promote the results of their own investigations … Continue reading Elsevier on Retraction Watch: “scholarly publishing is better for it”

Catching up: PLoS Pathogens apologizes for retracting XMRV-prostate cancer paper before contacting a corresponding author

Last week was a bit of a whirlwind in Retraction Land, thanks to a big study of retractions in PNAS and a lot of resulting press coverage. So we didn’t have a chance to update readers on an ongoing story and discussion involving the PLoS journals. As ScienceInsider was first to report last week, the … Continue reading Catching up: PLoS Pathogens apologizes for retracting XMRV-prostate cancer paper before contacting a corresponding author

Math paper retracted because it “contains no scientific content”

Have a seat, this one’s a howler. According to a retraction notice for “Computer application in mathematics,” published in Computers & Mathematics with Applications:

Redox, redux: Journal pulls paper over data problems

Antioxidants & Redox Signalling has issued much more detailed retraction notice for a paper it pulled last year that was marred by duplicate data. As we reported then, the journal’s initial notice for the 2011 article, titled “Inhibition of LXRa-dependent steatosis and oxidative injury by liquiritigenin, a licorice flavonoid, as mediated with Nrf2 activation,” was … Continue reading Redox, redux: Journal pulls paper over data problems

Mysterious retraction in the Journal of Biological Chemistry for Takashi Tsuji’s group

The authors of a paper in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) have retracted it, but don’t ask us why. This being the JBC, the retraction notice for “Human T-cell Leukemia Virus Type I Tax Down-regulates the Expression of Phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-Trisphosphate Inositol Phosphatases via the NF-κB Pathway” is the very definition of opaque:

Why editors should stop ignoring anonymous whistleblowers: Our latest LabTimes column

A retraction notice appeared a few months ago in the Biophysical Journal: This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of Edward Egelman, Editor-in-Chief. The editors have noted that there is a substantial overlap of figures and text between this Biophysical Journal … Continue reading Why editors should stop ignoring anonymous whistleblowers: Our latest LabTimes column

Florida group loses second hypertension paper, but retraction notice stays mum on why

We’ve obviously gotten plenty of mileage out of our conversation last January with L. Henry Edmunds, the grumpypants editor of the Annals of Thoracic Surgery who told us that the reason behind an opaque retraction notice in his journal was “none of  [our] damn business.” Still makes us chuckle. That episode came to mind recently … Continue reading Florida group loses second hypertension paper, but retraction notice stays mum on why

Do editors like talking about journals’ mistakes? Nature takes on retractions

One of the themes we’ve hit hard here at Retraction Watch is that there is tremendous variation in how journals deal with retractions. Some make notices crystal clear, while others seem to want to make them as opaque as possible. Some editors go out of their way to publicize withdrawals, while others bury them and won’t talk about them … Continue reading Do editors like talking about journals’ mistakes? Nature takes on retractions

Oxford University Press clarifies policy: All retraction notices will be open access

Last week, we reported on an uniformative retraction notice in Molecular Biology and Evolution (MBE), an Oxford University Press (OUP) title, that the publisher wanted $32 to read. To OUP’s credit, they quickly acknowledged that the retraction hadn’t been handled properly. Earlier this week, OUP’s senior publisher for journals Cathy Kennedy followed up with some … Continue reading Oxford University Press clarifies policy: All retraction notices will be open access