A group of authors at Nagoya University and Kyoto University have retracted a 2019 Nature paper because of errors.
Here’s the retraction notice:
Continue reading Authors retract Nature paper after realizing some data were “calculated wrongly”
A journal published by the Royal Society in the United Kingdom has issued an updated expression of concern for a 2018 paper by a mathematician whose work has been the subject of intense scrutiny on this website and elsewhere. But the notice is less of a statement of problems than a rationalization.
The paper, “Quantum correlations are weaved by the spinors of the Euclidean primitives,” was written by Joy Christian, of the “Einstein Centre for Local-Realistic Physics in Oxford.” In May 2018, the journal issued an initial EoC about the article, stating:
Continue reading Subtraction by addition: A journal expresses concern again — but this time, with feeling
A cancer researcher faked a dozen images in three papers and a conference presentation while employed at Harvard teaching hospitals, according to a new report by a federal U.S. watchdog.
The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) found that David Panka
Continue reading Former Harvard cancer researcher faked a dozen images, say Feds
A stem cell researcher in Japan could end up with 23 retractions after officials at his former institution confirmed that he’d committed research misconduct in nearly two dozen papers.
According to a report released last week by Aichi Gakuin University, Nobuaki Ozeki misused images, fabricated data and recycled text in 20 papers. Ozeki has had 19 papers retracted to date, 17 of which are described in the analysis. The latest report — an offshoot of one in 2018 that found he had committed misconduct in three papers — expands Ozeki’s liability to 22 articles.
Ozeki has roughly 40 indexed journal articles on his CV, however, and journals may decide to conduct their own investigations into his work. Articles in the International Journal of Medical Sciences, Differentiation, and the Journal of Endodontics were named in the report but so far remain intact.
Continue reading Stem cell researcher’s retraction count may near two dozen
A cognitive psychologist in Germany has lost one of two papers slated for retraction after her former institution found her guilty of misconduct.
In a 2019 report, Leiden University found that Lorenza Colzato, now of TU Dresden, had failed to obtain ethics ethics approval for some of her studies, manipulated her data and fabricated results in grant applications. Although the institution did not identify Colzato by name, Retraction Watch confirmed her identity.
The Leiden report — the conclusions of which were affirmed by the Netherlands Board on Research Integrity last month — called for the retraction of two papers by Colzato and her co-authors, three of whom acted as whistleblowers in the case. As the trio told us in an interview last December:
Continue reading Psychologist’s paper retracted after Dutch national body affirms misconduct findings
Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 39.
Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Continue reading Weekend reads: Stem cell trouble?; retractions of articles on a newborn’s death; facial recognition papers draw scrutiny
A Nature journal has announced that it is conducting a “priority” investigation into a new paper claiming that women in science fare better with male rather than female mentors.
The article, “The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance,” appeared in Nature Communications on November 17, and was written by a trio of authors from New York University’s campus in Abu Dhabi.
According to the abstract:
Continue reading Nature Communications looking into paper on mentorship after strong negative reaction
Science has retracted a 13-year-old paper, five years after data sleuth Elisabeth Bik first raised questions about issues with the images in the article.
The paper, “Secondary siRNAs result from unprimed RNA synthesis and form a distinct class,” appeared in 2007 and was written by a group of researchers in the Netherlands and Switzerland. The senior author of the study was Ronald Plasterk, founder of Frame Cancer Therapeutics in Amsterdam and once a minister in the Dutch government. The article has been cited at least 300 times, according to Clarivate Analytics Web of Science.
It also drew Bik’s attention. In 2015, she posted — as Peer 1 — on PubPeer about her concerns with one of the figures in the paper. Other commenters joined in, including to point out similarities between images in the Science paper and two other articles from members of the group.
Bik said the paper:
Continue reading Science retracts paper co-authored by high-profile scientist and former Dutch minister
Researchers who lost a paper derided by critics as anti-vaccine have republished their article in a different journal … owned by the same publisher (hint: rhymes with “smells of beer”).
As we reported in April 2019, the original article version of “Cognition and behavior in sheep repetitively inoculated with aluminum adjuvant-containing vaccines or aluminum adjuvant only” appeared in November 2018 in Pharmacological Research.
Antivaccine advocates such as Celeste McGovern seized on the study, which also drew harsh criticism from Skeptical Raptor and Orac, who called it
Continue reading Publisher infected twice with the same anti-vaccine article
An author tells us he is taking legal action against a journal and its publisher after the editor retracted one of his papers and flagged two others.
The Health Informatics Journal has issued expressions of concern for two articles on autism and retracted one on obesity in children. According to the journal, the papers — led by Fadi Thabtah, of the Manukau Institute of Technology in Auckland, New Zealand — were marred by compromised peer review.
But that’s not all. Apparently, well, things change.
Here’s what the EoCs have to say:
Continue reading Author initiates “a legal process” against a journal and its publisher after a retraction, expressions of concern.jpg){kind=link}