The week at Retraction Watch featured an adventure in irony as a paper on plagiarism was retracted for…plagiarism, as well as another retraction for high-profile cancer research Robert Weinberg. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
This week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of yet another spoof article, and the temporary shutdown of a journal. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
CHICAGO — Almost two years after editors at 18 journals agreed in March 2011 to retract 88 of former retraction record holder Joachim Boldt’s papers, 10% of them hadn’t been retracted. That’s what Nadia Elia, Liz Wager, and Martin Tramer reported here Sunday in an abstract at the Seventh International Congress on Peer Review and … Continue reading What happened to Joachim Boldt’s 88 papers that were supposed to be retracted?
Perhaps it’s appropriate given the Easter season, but we have learned that Naoki Mori, the Japanese cancer researcher who received a 10-year publishing ban from the American Society of Microbiology (ASM) for imagine manipulation, has published a new paper. Mori, who was fired and then rehired by the University of the Ryukyus over the scandal, … Continue reading Back in the saddle: After more than 30 retractions, Naoki Mori publishing again
Over the past 14 months, we’ve covered several cases of retractions that were punished with publishing bans: Serial image manipulator Naoki Mori was slapped with one by the American Society of Microbiology (ASM) – which publishes Infection and Immunity, The Journal of Clinical Microbiology, and others The ASM banned another author, who plagiarized and did some … Continue reading Should journals ban researchers found guilty of fraud from publishing?
Believe it or not, we look for policies to praise here at Retraction Watch HQ, especially if they mark a change from approaches that we and others have criticized. So we were heartened to read this retraction notice in The Journal of Neuroscience for “Lmx1b-Controlled Isthmic Organizer Is Essential for Development of Midbrain Dopaminergic Neurons:” … Continue reading Does a new retraction suggest a glimmer of hope for transparency at the Journal of Neuroscience?
Today marks the 1-year anniversary of the launch of Retraction Watch. We’d like to thank our readers, tipsters, and fans for your support and feedback — and our helpful critics who have spurred us to do better. Over the past 12 months we’ve written more than 250 posts about retractions ranging from the extraordinary — think … Continue reading Happy anniversary, Retraction Watch: What we’ve learned, and what’s in store for year two
Liz Wager, the chair of the Committee on Publication Ethics, knows something about retractions. In April, she and University College London’s Peter Williams published a paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics showing that journal editors’ approaches to retractions aren’t uniform. The pair is back with another paper, using the same dataset of retractions and published … Continue reading Why do — and don’t — journal editors retract articles?
Misconduct happens. So what can journal editors do find and prevent it? While we don’t claim to be experts in working on the other side of the fence — eg as editors — Ivan was flattered to be asked by session organizers at the Council of Science Editors to appear on a panel on the … Continue reading How journal editors can detect and deter scientific misconduct
A team of Australian medical writers who analyzed four decades worth of retractions has reached the conclusion — we trust you’re sitting — that people in their profession are more honest than, well, the rest of us. According to the authors, articles in the medical literature are substantially less likely than other papers to be … Continue reading Want to avoid a retraction? Hire a medical writer, say medical writers