Less than two weeks ago, PLOS ONE published a paper about the parents of teenagers who appeared to immediately start questioning their gender identity around the time of puberty. Then the critiques flooded in. The paper — about a highly contentious issue — surveyed parents who felt that their children had suddenly started to question … Continue reading Reader outcry prompts Brown to retract press release on trans teens
A professor specializing in the health of children and pregnant women has left her post at the University of Glasgow, and issued three retractions in recent months. All three notices — issued by PLOS ONE — mention an investigation at the university, which found signs of data manipulation and falsification. Fiona Lyall, the last author … Continue reading Glasgow professor leaves post amidst multiple retractions
In early 2011, less than six months after we launched Retraction Watch, we came across a retraction from a surgery journal. The notice was scant on details, so co-founder Adam Marcus called the editor to ask why the paper had been retracted. The answer: “It’s none of your damn business.” It turns out that’s still … Continue reading Journal editors still don’t like talking about misconduct. And that’s a problem.
Evelyne Decullier & Hervé Maisonneuve have been studying retractions for a long time. They’ve looked at how long retractions take to show up in PubMed, and five years ago they published a paper on the quality of retraction notices — and how well they were disseminated — in 2008. Now, they’ve repeated that analysis for … Continue reading Have retraction notices improved over time?
A probe into the work of a researcher who studied natural products for cancer had many stops and starts along the way — including five extensions granted by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity — according to documents obtained by Retraction Watch. Following a public records request, we recently obtained a copy of the report … Continue reading A misconduct probe — which led to 20 retraction requests — took four years. Why?
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 a retraction and replacement of a diet study in the … Continue reading Weekend reads: How to kill zombie citations; wanted: 6,000 new journals; does peer review matter anymore?
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 allegations of text reuse by a Harvard professor, news about … Continue reading Weekend reads: Scientists citing themselves; gender and clinical trials; jail after plagiarism
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 the University of Alabama’s request for 20 retractions of papers … Continue reading Weekend reads: Science is “show me,” not “trust me;” pressure to publish survey data; what peer review misses
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 a collaboration with Undark looking at how scientists who commit … Continue reading Weekend reads: How to get away with scientific fraud; what’s wrong with nutrition research; a second chance after misconduct
What Caught Our Attention: A tree of life paper has been axed — and based on the information in the retraction notice, we’re wondering how it ever passed peer review. Specifically, the notice states a review of the paper found “concerns regarding the study design, methodology, and interpretation of the data.” Overall, the research “contradict(s) … Continue reading Caught Our Notice: Hey peer reviewers — did you even read this paper??