Search Results for: plagiarism

Biology journal bans plagiarizers, reviewers with non-institutional email addresses

DNA and Cell Biology has declared it will ban any authors who submit plagiarized manuscripts for three years, and will no longer accept suggestions of reviewers with non-institutional email addresses. The move comes after a wave of hundreds of retractions stemming from fake peer reviews, often occurring when authors supply fake emails for suggested reviewers. In an … Continue reading Biology journal bans plagiarizers, reviewers with non-institutional email addresses

Weekend reads, part 1: Pirating paywalled papers; a sex scandal and fudged data at Stanford

The week at Retraction Watch featured a lot of movement on our leaderboard, with a new total for Diederik Stapel, and a new entry. It also featured a lot going on elsewhere, so here’s part I of Weekend Reads (we’ll have more tomorrow morning):

BMC investigating allegedly copied paper

BioMed Central is investigating a recent paper about a potential biomarker for liver cancer, which shows signs it was written using another article as a template. According to Jeffrey Beall, who exposed the similarities between the two papers on his blog Scholarly Open Access yesterday, the paper in question is “obviously bogus,” and appears to have relied … Continue reading BMC investigating allegedly copied paper

Serial plagiarist’s retractions upped to 14

We’ve done some digging, run the numbers, and present to you a new member of our leaderboard: orthopedic researcher Bernardino Saccomanni. Nine newly unearthed retractions of his make for a total of 14. We first reported on Saccomanni’s work back in 2011, and identified him as a “serial plagiarist.” In the years since, he’s continued to rack … Continue reading Serial plagiarist’s retractions upped to 14

Weekend reads: FDA nominee authorship questions; low economics replication rates

The week at Retraction Watch featured a mysterious retraction from PLOS ONE, and a thoughtful piece by a scientist we’ve covered frequently on where we went wrong in that coverage. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Journal bans authors of duplicated asthma paper

A common ailment known as duplication has taken down a paper about a common fungus and asthma. Aspergillus spores are often ubiquitous yet harmless, but can irritate people whose lungs aren’t in top working order. Duplication, on the other hand, is more universally deadly. The editors of The Pan African Medical Journal told us that, in addition to the retraction, there … Continue reading Journal bans authors of duplicated asthma paper

Weekend reads, part 1: Editor slams PubPeer; scientific fraud pays off

The week at Retraction Watch featured yet another case of fake peer review, and a court sentence for a Danish researcher found to have committed fraud. Here’s what was happening elsewhere (stay tuned for part 2 tomorrow):

Weekend reads: STAP saga over once and for all?; plagiarizing prof gets tenure

The week at Retraction Watch featured the appeal of a modern-day retraction, and a look at whether a retraction by a Nobel Prize winner should be retracted 50 years later. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Can you spot the signs of retraction? Just count the errors, says a new study

Clinical studies that eventually get retracted are originally published with significantly more errors than non-retracted trials from the same journal, according to a new study in BMJ. The authors actually called the errors “discrepancies” — for example, mathematical mistakes such as incorrect percentages of patients in a subgroup, contradictory results, or statistical errors. The study doesn’t predict … Continue reading Can you spot the signs of retraction? Just count the errors, says a new study

Author appeals retraction after co-authors dispute Nature Comm paper

Two weeks after Nature Communications published a paper on asymmetric cell division in July, it posted a retraction notice saying the paper was submitted “without the knowledge or consent” of all but the corresponding author. The following day the journal “amended” the retraction note to include the initials of the corresponding author, Aicha Metchat, then based … Continue reading Author appeals retraction after co-authors dispute Nature Comm paper