If you notice an obvious problem with a paper in your field, it should be relatively easy to alert the journal’s readers to the issue, right? Unfortunately, for a group of nutrition researchers led by David B. Allison at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, that is not their experience. Allison and his co-author Andrew Brown … Continue reading Want to correct the scientific literature? Good luck
When an entry on Wikipedia dies, can it come back as a paper in a peer-reviewed journal? Apparently not, according to the Indian Journal of Psychiatry, which has retracted a 2013 article about reincarnation after discovering the authors lifted text from a “old revision” of a Wikipedia entry on the subject. The article, “The mystery of … Continue reading Wikipedia page reincarnated as paper: Authors plagiarized paper on reincarnation
After a group of researchers noticed an error that affected the analysis of a survey of psychologists working with medical teams to help pediatric patients, they didn’t just issue a retraction — they published a commentary explaining what exactly went wrong. The error was discovered by a research assistant who was assembling a scientific poster, and noticed … Continue reading What to do when you make a mistake? Advice from authors who’ve been there
Investigations at two institutions at Taiwan determined in 2013 that a renewable energy researcher duplicated his own work; the researcher agreed to pull 10 papers. A total of six have been withdrawn or retracted, two in November, 2015. Shyi-Min Lu is the corresponding author on the two newly retracted papers, from Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. The retractions follow investigations at the … Continue reading Renewable energy researcher recycled material, agrees to withdraw 10 papers
John Shannon may be a mere undergrad at Hillsdale College in Michigan, but he knows enough about history to be surprised that Aristotle had written an entire book about economics that Shannon had never heard of. That curiosity led to the discovery that a highly cited paper about pricing in cancer drugs was missing a reference to a … Continue reading Oh no he didn’t! Misattributed Aristotle work leads to correction in highly cited cancer paper
The week at Retraction Watch featured a move by the Journal of Biological Chemistry that we’re applauding, a retraction by a high-profile nutrition researcher, and an announcement about a new partnership to create a retraction database. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
This morning, our thoughts are with the people of Paris. The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper claiming dramatically higher rates of sexual trauma among men in the military, and a look at whether gender plays a role in peer review. Also: We’re hiring. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Two sets of authors have withdrawn their papers from the Journal of Biological Chemistry. We’re telling you about the both together because, true to JBC form, there’s not too much to say. The retraction notices for both papers — about the molecular underpinnings of cardiac fibroblasts and melanoma cells — are identical:
Thirteen papers in Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids now have an expression of concern, after it came to light that an author on most of the papers coordinated the peer-review process. David Y. Gao, a well-known and prolific mathematician at the Federation University Australia, is the author of 11 of the papers, and also the guest editor of … Continue reading Author’s coordination of peer review flags 13 math papers
An open-access journal with a speedy peer review process has been having some issues with a retracted article on the biology of sex addiction. Here’s the simple timeline of events: “Hypersexuality Addiction and Withdrawal: Phenomenology, Neurogenetics and Epigenetics,” a review article, was published by Cureus in July, following a two-day peer review. In the weeks that followed, the paper received a … Continue reading Sex addiction article retracted, republished