The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at what happens to authors when a journal is delisted, a reminder of how hard it is to figure out whether a paper has been retracted, and a survey on how common plagiarism is in economics. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
It’s always interesting to know how many researchers in any given field engage in so-called questionable research practices that don’t rise to the level of out-and-out fraud: honorary authorship, citing articles they don’t read, choosing reference lists that would please editors or reviewers, for instance. And when the researchers work in a field with potential … Continue reading “Ethical shades of gray:” 90% of researchers in new health field admit to questionable practices
Are individual scientists now more productive early in their careers than 100 years ago? No, according to a large analysis of publication records released by PLOS ONE today. Despite concerns of rising “salami slicing” in research papers in line with the “publish or perish” philosophy of academic publishing, the study found that individual early career researchers’ productivity has … Continue reading Researchers’ productivity hasn’t increased in a century, study suggests
A group of authors published two articles about one study on pain during childbirth, so one journal is retracting it. This may seem like a standard case of salami slicing — but this one comes with a nearly 600-word commentary co-authored by the editors of the two journals in question. The commentary lays out — … Continue reading Labor pains study brought into this world twice
In August, we reported on a clinical trial on hundreds of hypertensive patients that was published six times. Now, copies published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety and Journal of the American Society of Hypertension (JASH) have been retracted, making for a total of three retractions for the group of papers. The authors have defended the papers as being decidedly … Continue reading Authors defend publishing clinical trial six times, even as they earn two more retractions
We haven’t covered that many retractions in economics, and a 2012 paper found very few such retractions. Now, a new study based on a survey of economists tries to get a handle on how often economists commit scientific misconduct. Here’s the abstract of “Scientific misbehavior in economics,” which appeared in Research Policy:
A U.K. urban planner and self-styled expert on “truth and lying” has launched a forceful attack on the ethics of a key trade association, accusing it of refusing to promote his work for fear that the findings might be damaging to the profession. And what, you’re asking, does this have to do with retractions? Trust … Continue reading Mean streets: Expert on lying accuses planning association of ethical lapses
Sometimes, retraction notices offer tantalizing clues, but no real information. Take the case of a paper called “Florid osseous dysplasia,” which was published last year in Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology by a group at Mumbai’s Nair Hospital Dental College and retracted recently. Here’s the notice, which is suggestive but doesn’t say much:
Readers of three science publications may be wondering, “Where in the world were the editors?” after retractions appeared recently in the journals sounding the same theme: The articles in question had too much “overlap” between previous publications. For example, the Journal of Fish Biology notice reads, in part: “The retraction has been agreed due to … Continue reading Department of Redundancy Department: From fish to toxicology, where have all the editors gone?
Harold “Skip” Garner has worn many hats over the course of his career, including plasma physicist, biologist, and administrator. One of his interests is plagiarism and duplication the scientific literature, and he and colleagues developed a tool called eTBLAST that compares text passages to what has already been published to flag potential overlap. A new … Continue reading ‘Conference organizers have ignored this:’ How common is plagiarism and duplication in abstracts?