Search Results for: sting

“Just significant” results have been around for decades in psychology — but have gotten worse: study

Last year, two psychology researchers set out to figure out whether the statistical results psychologists were reporting in the literature were distributed the way you’d expect. We’ll let the authors, E.J. Masicampo, of Wake Forest, and Daniel Lalande, of the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, explain why they did that: The psychology literature is meant … Continue reading “Just significant” results have been around for decades in psychology — but have gotten worse: study

Second retraction stemming from Cardiff investigations appears

A second retraction of a paper by a Cardiff University researcher found to have committed misconduct has appeared. In April, a Cardiff investigation found that Rossen Donev, a former researcher at the university, had manipulated images in four different papers. Donev, who was at the University of Swansea until August, according to his LinkedIn profile, … Continue reading Second retraction stemming from Cardiff investigations appears

Doing the right thing: Scientists reward authors who report their own errors, says study

We’ve always like to highlight cases in which scientists do the right thing and retract problematic papers themselves, rather than being forced to by editors and publishers. Apparently, according to a new paper by economists and management scholars, scientists reward that sort of behavior, too. The study by Benjamin Jones of the Kellogg School of … Continue reading Doing the right thing: Scientists reward authors who report their own errors, says study

Two detailed retraction notices correct the cardiology record

Two American College of Cardiology conference abstracts published earlier this year in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) have been retracted, one because the authors were actually measuring something other than what they reported, and the other because newer software invalidated the results. Here’s the notice for “Worsening of Pre-Existing Valvulopathy With … Continue reading Two detailed retraction notices correct the cardiology record

Chopping broccoli: Researchers lose paper on florets after readers raise questions

With apologies to Dana Carvey, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters has chopped a 2012 paper on the molecular constituents of broccoli florets after readers evidently were forced to do the job of reviewers and point out fatal flaws in the study. The article, “Two novel bioactive glucosinolates from Broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. var. italica) florets,” … Continue reading Chopping broccoli: Researchers lose paper on florets after readers raise questions

No, math prof, Google isn’t a proper literature search (and don’t plagiarize your dead mentor)

Sometimes, it’s easiest and most straightforward if we just let retraction notices sink in before we comment on them. Take this one from Semigroup Forum, signed by Chong-yih Wu of National Pingtung Institute of Commerce, Pingtung, Taiwan:

Retraction for authors of muscle paper who lifted data from their own 18-year-old article

For the second time in a week, we’ve seen a journal retract a paper because it duplicated something in its own archive. Yesterday, it was a case of plagiarism in a plant journal. Today, we find that the Journal of Anatomy has retracted an article it published earlier this year by a group of Slovenian … Continue reading Retraction for authors of muscle paper who lifted data from their own 18-year-old article

Retraction for stem cell scientist facing misconduct inquiry

Here’s a retraction from Stem Cells and Development that we’re just now getting around to covering. The paper, “Non-viral reprogramming of skeletal myoblasts with valproic acid for pluripotency,” appeared in June 2012 in a preliminary online form and was written by a group at the University of Cincinnati. As the retraction notice states:

PubMed now allows comments on abstracts — but only by a select few

PubMed today launches a pilot version of PubMed Commons, a system that enables researchers to share their opinions about scientific publications. Researchers can comment on any publication indexed by PubMed, and read the comments of others. In general, we’re big fans of post-publication peer review, as Retraction Watch readers know. Once it’s out of its … Continue reading PubMed now allows comments on abstracts — but only by a select few

Italian cancer specialist facing criminal investigation for misconduct

A leading Neapolitan cancer researcher is under criminal investigation for fraud, the Italian press is reporting. Although we have only rough translations of the story, it seems the researcher, Alfredo Fusco, of the National Council of Research’s Institute of Experimental Endocrinology and Oncology, has been accused of manipulating images in published studies and to strengthen … Continue reading Italian cancer specialist facing criminal investigation for misconduct