Journal repels a paper on a magnetic material after authorship, funding issues

A paper on the properties of a magnetic material is being retracted after including an author without his permission, and omitting a funding source. According to the note, the work was done in Miao Yu‘s lab at Chongqing University in China; the authors then added Yu’s name to the paper without his authorization, and neglected to list a relevant … Continue reading Journal repels a paper on a magnetic material after authorship, funding issues

Improving reproducibility: What can funders do? Guest post by Dorothy Bishop

We’re pleased to present a guest post from Dorothy Bishop, a researcher who focuses on neurodevelopmental disorders at Oxford University, and is also heavily involved in efforts to improve reproducibility in science, including chairing the steering committee of a recent symposium on the topic organised by the Academy of Medical Sciences. Here, she talks about … Continue reading Improving reproducibility: What can funders do? Guest post by Dorothy Bishop

Weekend reads: Papers de-emphasized for funding; reproducibility revolution; reining in fraud in China

The week at Retraction Watch featured a particularly misleading retraction notice, and a university stripping a graduate of her PhD for misconduct. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Cholesterol paper duplicated; “The authors believed that they had taken the necessary steps to withdraw.”

A review journal is pulling a 2013 article about advances in researchers’ understanding of cholesterol after seeing the same article in another journal. Although the retracted paper appeared first — online in Biological Reviews in February, 2013 — the journal decided to retract it after learning the authors had initially submitted it elsewhere. The first submission was … Continue reading Cholesterol paper duplicated; “The authors believed that they had taken the necessary steps to withdraw.”

Lizards aren’t getting hotter faster than the planet after all, says retraction

A paper that raised alarms by suggesting lizards were warming even faster than the planet has been retracted after the authors employed the wrong method to measure temperatures. Some scientists thought that, because of the way lizards retain heat to regulate their cold-blooded bodies, they might be more sensitive to temperature changes. Well, not in this case. … Continue reading Lizards aren’t getting hotter faster than the planet after all, says retraction

Weekend reads: Journal invents time machine; endless author lists; is nuance overrated?

The week at Retraction Watch featured the unmasking of the people behind PubPeer, and an editor doing the right thing following a high-profile retraction. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

NSF investigation of high-profile plant retractions ends in two debarments

A nearly ten-year-long series of investigations into a pair of plant physiologists who received millions in funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation has resulted in debarments of less than two years for each of the researchers. The NSF Office of Inspector General recently posted its close-out report on its decision and a review of … Continue reading NSF investigation of high-profile plant retractions ends in two debarments

Recursive recursiveness: Retracted Lewandowsky et al conspiracy ideation study republished

A paper on “the role of conspiracist ideation in climate denial” whose puzzling publication (and retraction) history formed the basis of a series of Retraction Watch posts in 2013 and 2014 is back, as part of a new article in a different journal. Retraction Watch readers may recall a paper published in 2013 in Frontiers … Continue reading Recursive recursiveness: Retracted Lewandowsky et al conspiracy ideation study republished

Weekend reads: Is failing to share data misconduct?; worst journal ever; Elsevier boycott

The big news this week at Retraction Watch was the release of more than two dozen retractions for accounting researcher James Hunton, and the sentencing of Dong-Pyou Han for scientific fraud (see more below). Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: LaCour loses job offer; new Science data guidelines; Macchiarini grant funding frozen

This week at Retraction Watch saw us report on thousands of retractions from IEEE, which will have a serious effect on retraction record-keeping, a bizarre case of author impersonation, and a look at dentistry in outer space. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: