The scientific literature has started to hint at the fallout of a case of potential fraud in Denmark. As Nature reported in January: A high-profile neuroscientist in Denmark has resigned after facing allegations that she committed research misconduct and misspent grant money. Meanwhile, the administration at the university where she worked has been accused of … Continue reading Expressions of Concern arrive in Milena Penkowa case
A neuroscientist who was stripped of her PhD by Danish officials as part of a case going back a decade has notched her ninth retraction — but it took a while. In 2010, following questions about her work, Milena Penkowa received a three month suspended sentence for embezzlement, document forgery, and “fabrication of evidence.” A … Continue reading Years later, researcher at center of highly publicized case has another paper retracted
The week at Retraction Watch featured a post on just how much an authorship costs if you want to buy one, anger over charges to use a common research tool, and the revocation of a PhD from a once-rising star scientist. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
In six weeks, new policies for handling misconduct in Denmark will go into effect, which alter the definition of misconduct and establish clear policies for who handles such allegations. Starting July 1, research misconduct will be limited to how it’s typically defined elsewhere — fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (the previous definition included serious breaches of … Continue reading Denmark to institute sweeping changes in handling misconduct
A Copenhagen court has cleared neuroscientist Milena Penkowa of the most serious charges against her after she appealed a 2015 verdict that she had faked data. According to the CPH Post, the Eastern High Court in Copenhagen dismissed the case. Although the court acknowledged she had committed fraud, it declared it was not “serious forgery.” On Facebook, Penkowa posted … Continue reading Danish court dismisses charges against neuroscientist in appeal of fraud verdict
In a rare development, neuroscientist Milena Penkowa has been sentenced by a Danish court for faking data. The ruling, from the Copenhagen City Court, resulted from Penkowa’s publication of her 2003 thesis describing experiments that she never carried out. The court “placed weight” on the fact that she didn’t just commit fraud, but “systematically supplied false information” to avoid … Continue reading Danish neuroscientist sentenced by court for lying about faked experiments
Lawyers one, scientists nil. Danish judges have overruled scientists in that nation, concluding that a panel of experts erred in finding that physiologist Bente Klarlund Pedersen, of the University of Copenhagen, was guilty of misconduct. Last September, Pedersen announced that she would fight the ruling of the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD, Danish acronym … Continue reading Danish high court clears Pedersen in misconduct case
News elsewhere about scientific integrity, publishing, and related issues abounded this week:
The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD, Danish acronym UVVU) has partially reversed a December 2013 finding of misconduct against a scientist in Denmark, but has upheld most of its ruling. Bente Klarlund Pedersen, whose case was tied up with that of Milena Penkowa, another scientist in Denmark found guilty of misconduct, committed misconduct in … Continue reading Danish committee rejects much of Klarlund Pedersen’s appeal of misconduct findings
A Danish researcher has responded to a draft report of the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) that found she had acted in a “scientifically dishonest” and “grossly negligent” manner. Bente Klarlund Pedersen, a University of Copenhagen researcher, has published with Milena Penkowa, four of whose papers have been retracted following investigations. In the press, … Continue reading Regrettable, but not scientifically dishonest: Klarlund Pedersen responds to Danish committee