PubPeer Selections: Male vs. female brains, health care serial killers, corrections on the way
Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:
Search Results for: nature
The Peer Review Scam: How authors are reviewing their own papers
Yesterday, we reported on the discovery by BioMed Central that there were about 50 papers in their editorial system whose authors had recommended fake peer reviewers. Those “reviewers” had submitted reviews of a number of manuscripts, and five of the papers had been published. (BMC posted a blog examining the case this morning.) For some … Continue reading The Peer Review Scam: How authors are reviewing their own papers
“I’m so done with it”: Conservationist speaks out against sexism in science
Last week, we wrote about conservationist Stuart Pimm receiving criticism for casual sexism in a recent book review. The journal did not retract the review, but it released an editor’s note condemning the language Pimm used, including quoting a movie scene in which a man told a woman “I don’t take whores in taxis.” Some … Continue reading “I’m so done with it”: Conservationist speaks out against sexism in science
Are lawyers ruining science?
Regular Retraction Watch readers may have noticed that legal issues seem to be popping up more often in the cases we cover. There has been a lawsuit filed against PubPeer commenters, for example, and Nature last month blamed lawyers for delayed and opaque retraction notices. It was those cases and others that prompted us to … Continue reading Are lawyers ruining science?
Weekend reads: Novartis fires scientist for faking data; journal accepts F-bomb-laden spam paper
The week at Retraction Watch began with a case of a South Korean engineer who had to retract ten studies at once. Here’s what was happening elsewhere, along with an update on a story we covered a few days ago:
‘‘I don’t take whores in taxis”: Casual sexism in scientific journal leads to editor’s note
The Elsevier journal Biological Conservation has put out an apology, but not a retraction, after outcry over a bizarre, misogynistic non sequitur in a book review by Duke conservation biologist Stuart Pimm. Here’s the introduction to Pimm’s review of Keeping the Wild: Against the Domestication of Earth, which went online in October ahead of its December print publication:
Updated: Former Vanderbilt scientist faked nearly 70 images, will retract 6 papers: ORI
A former Vanderbilt University biomedical engineer committed fraud on a massive scale, according to a new Office of Research Integrity (ORI) report. Igor Dzhura is banned from receiving federal funding for three years, and is retracting six papers, which have been cited more than 500 times. Since leaving Vanderbilt, he has worked at SUNY Upstate … Continue reading Updated: Former Vanderbilt scientist faked nearly 70 images, will retract 6 papers: ORI
“Conscious fabrication” leads to retraction of diabetes study
Diabetologia has retracted a 2011 meeting abstract from a group in Sweden, indicating that the second author has been found guilty of research misconduct — a charge the scientist denies. The abstract, “Reduced syntaxin-5 in skeletal muscle of patients with type 2 diabetes is linked to increased diacylglycerol, activation of PKCtheta and impaired insulin signalling,” … Continue reading “Conscious fabrication” leads to retraction of diabetes study
PubPeer Selections: From “this comment is clearly unfounded” to “happy to elaborate,” a range of responses
Late last week, Nature reported some details of PubPeer’s fight against a subpoena from a researcher who claims to have lost a job because of comments on the site. (Background here.) Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:
Weekend reads: Speed kills in publishing too; studying blank pages; apologies for the Rosetta Shirt
Highlights at Retraction Watch this week included a case of overly honest referencing and the story of how a medical resident flagged up a pseudoscientific study. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: