Search Results for: sting

Poll: If authors don’t address mistakes, is that misconduct?

In an interesting letter printed in today’s Nature, biologists Sophien Kamoun and Cyril Zipfel suggest that “failure by authors to correct their mistakes should be classified as scientific misconduct.” They note that this policy is already in place at their institute, The Sainsbury Laboratory (TSL). We contacted Kamoun to ask what constituted a mistake, given that numerous papers have received queries, such … Continue reading Poll: If authors don’t address mistakes, is that misconduct?

Researchers’ productivity hasn’t increased in a century, study suggests

Are individual scientists now more productive early in their careers than 100 years ago? No, according to a large analysis of publication records released by PLOS ONE today. Despite concerns of rising “salami slicing” in research papers in line with the “publish or perish” philosophy of academic publishing, the study found that individual early career researchers’ productivity has … Continue reading Researchers’ productivity hasn’t increased in a century, study suggests

Authors retract striking circadian clock finding after failing to replicate

The authors of a paper showing a “striking and unanticipated” relationship between light and temperature in regulating circadian rhythms are retracting it when the results couldn’t be replicated. After being contacted by another group who couldn’t reproduce the data, the authors failed to, as well. They “have absolutely no explanation for the discrepancies with the original … Continue reading Authors retract striking circadian clock finding after failing to replicate

Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

There’s a new paper about retractions, and it’s chock-full of the kind of data that we love to geek out on. Enjoy. The new paper, “A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact,” appears on the preprint server arXiv — meaning it has yet to be peer-reviewed — and is co-authored … Continue reading Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

Let’s not mischaracterize replication studies: authors

Scientists have been abuzz over a report in last week’s Science questioning the results of a recent landmark effort to replicate 100 published studies in top psychology journals. The critique of this effort – which suggested the authors couldn’t replicate most of the research because they didn’t adhere closely enough to the original studies – … Continue reading Let’s not mischaracterize replication studies: authors

Weekend reads: Replication debate heats up again; NEJM fooled?; how to boost your alt-metrics

The week at Retraction Watch was dominated by the retraction of “the Creator” paper, but we also reported on a scientist under investigation losing a grant, and a case brewing at a New Jersey university. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

When misconduct strikes: A fictional tale

Pernille Rørth is not your typical novelist. She was a scientist for 25 years and was also editor-in-chief of the EMBO Journal for five years. But now, she’s written a novel – Raw Data – about an incident of misconduct that forces a top lab in Boston to retract a prominent Nature paper. The novel … Continue reading When misconduct strikes: A fictional tale

More than half of top-tier economics papers are replicable, study finds

Approximately six out of 10 economics studies published in the field’s most reputable journals — American Economic Review and the Quarterly Journal of Economics — are replicable, according to a study published today in Science. The authors repeated the results of 18 papers published between 2011 and 2014 and found 11 — approximately 61% — … Continue reading More than half of top-tier economics papers are replicable, study finds

Sample tampering leads to plant scientist’s 7th retraction

Plant scientist Jorge Vivanco has earned his seventh retraction, after an investigation found data from soil samples were “intentionally fabricated by a third party.” Vivanco and his former postdoc Harsh Bais made a name for themselves by discovering the secret behind a nasty invasive plant: It secretes a harmful form of catechin, which kills everything around it, suggesting it could … Continue reading Sample tampering leads to plant scientist’s 7th retraction

Journals flag 6 papers, request investigation of New Jersey university biologists

Two journals have published six expressions of concern for a pair of biologists at Rowan University, and are asking the university to undertake an investigation. We contacted the editors of the two journals — Journal of Cell Science and Biology Open — who both said they decided to flag the papers after a reader raised … Continue reading Journals flag 6 papers, request investigation of New Jersey university biologists