Search Results for: nature

UCL finds errors in work by biologist Cossu, but no “deliberate intention to mislead”

A cell biologist at University College London (UCL) who has had one paper retracted and another corrected has been cleared of misconduct by the university. The news, first reported by Times Higher Education, comes after a retraction of a paper by Giulio Cossu prompted by pseudonymous whistleblower Clare Francis that we wrote about in January. … Continue reading UCL finds errors in work by biologist Cossu, but no “deliberate intention to mislead”

Failure to reproduce experiments, errors lead to retraction of pancreatic cancer paper

The authors of a paper in Laboratory Investigation have retracted it after they were unable to “reproduce key experiments,” and discovered “several minor errors.” Here’s the retraction notice for “Slug enhances invasion ability of pancreatic cancer cells through upregulation of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and actin cytoskeleton remodeling,” by Liqun Wu and colleagues of The Affiliated Hospital of … Continue reading Failure to reproduce experiments, errors lead to retraction of pancreatic cancer paper

Retraction 12 appears for Alirio Melendez, this one for plagiarism

The twelfth of Alirio Melendez’s 20-something retractions has appeared, in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology. Along with the retraction notice, the journal runs letters from the paper’s two co-authors. Melendez writes:

Update on “greatly enhanced” photonics paper, with two corrections — one by journal, one by us

Last month we wrote about a paper in Nature Photonics that, because of a measurement error, had to be retracted. It turns out that wasn’t the only problem with the article — but we’re afraid that the glitch requires us to issue a correction. The article, “Greatly enhanced continuous-wave terahertz emission by nano-electrodes in a … Continue reading Update on “greatly enhanced” photonics paper, with two corrections — one by journal, one by us

Vacuum retracts paper on nanorods for plagiarism, image manipulation

What’s that sucking sound you hear from the journal Vacuum? Why, a retraction, of course. The journal is pulling a 2012 paper by a group of researchers from India who stole images and used them in misleading ways — that’s data fabrication, kids. Here’s the retraction notice for the article, titled “Microwave synthesis, characterization and … Continue reading Vacuum retracts paper on nanorods for plagiarism, image manipulation

Arsenic-in-the-water paper with “interesting data” first corrected, now retracted

Note (4/9/13): John McArthur contacted us with a few corrections, which we have made below. The Journal of Contaminant Hydrology has retracted a 2008 paper by a group of Indian scientists for plagiarism and the failure to adequately reference their sources. What makes this case somewhat unusual is that the journal allowed the authors to … Continue reading Arsenic-in-the-water paper with “interesting data” first corrected, now retracted

Update: Lewandowsky et al paper on conspiracist ideation “provisionally removed” due to complaints

Last week, we covered the complicated story of a paper by Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues that had been removed — or at least all but the abstract — from its publisher’s site. Our angle on the story was how Frontiers, which publishes Frontiers in Personality Science and Individual Differences, where the study appeared, had handled … Continue reading Update: Lewandowsky et al paper on conspiracist ideation “provisionally removed” due to complaints

Cardiologist accused of misconduct strikes back in a journal

Retraction Watch readers may recall the case of Don Poldermans, a prominent Dutch cardiology researcher who left a research position in late 2011 amid an investigation into his work. In a letter in the American Journal of Medicine titled “Scientific Fraud or a Rush to Judgement?” Poldermans — three of whose papers are subject to … Continue reading Cardiologist accused of misconduct strikes back in a journal

Could the sequester mean more business for Retraction Watch?

Consider this a bit of a thought experiment, but hear us out. The National Institutes of Health earlier this month notified the scientists it funds that, thanks to the sequester, many may soon face cuts in those grants as the agency tries to deal with a reduction in its $30.9 billion budget. In her March … Continue reading Could the sequester mean more business for Retraction Watch?

Findings of “greatly enhanced” optics turn out to be, well, greatly enhanced

The authors of a paper in Nature Photonics have been forced to walk back their article after learning from another group of researchers that their conclusions likely were an, ahem, optical illusion. The paper, “Greatly enhanced continuous-wave terahertz emission by nano-electrodes in a photoconductive photomixer,” appeared in January 2012 and came from a team led … Continue reading Findings of “greatly enhanced” optics turn out to be, well, greatly enhanced