The week at Retraction Watch featured news of a fine for a doctor who took part in a controversial fake trial, and a likely unprecedented call for retraction by the U.S. FDA commissioner. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) has retracted two 2003 studies after concluding that figures in the papers had been duplicated, and portions of some figures in one paper “did not accurately represent the results of the experimental conditions.” The two newly retracted papers have the same last author — Therese Kinsella, a biochemist at … Continue reading Researcher in Ireland loses two 13-year old studies
We were struck recently by a paper in Scientometrics that proposed a unique way to fund scientists: Distribute money equally, but require that each scientist donate a portion to others – turning the federal funding system into a crowd-sourcing venture that funds people instead of projects. The proposal could save the inordinate amount of time scientists … Continue reading What if scientists funded each other?
The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at whether we have an epidemic of flawed meta-analyses, and the story of a strange case involving climate research and pseudonyms. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Note to self: If you’re going to duplicate your own work, don’t copy from papers that plagiarize others’ research. Just such a mistake has cost a PhD candidate three papers — although his co-author argues that a company is in part to blame. Hossein Jafarzadeh, who is studying mechanical engineering at the University of Tehran, apparently asked a … Continue reading A plagiarism loop: Authors copied from papers that had copied from others
Sometimes, the best way to expose a problem with the publishing process is to put it to a test — perhaps by performing a Sokal-style hoax, or submitting a paper with obvious flaws. In 2014, that’s just what a researcher in Kosovo did. Suspicious that a journal wasn’t doing a thorough job of vetting submissions, she decided to … Continue reading Sting operation forces predatory publisher to pull paper
A biology journal has blacklisted authors from publishing their work after finding their case report about a dementia patient with hypersexuality was plagiarized from a previously published report. The retraction notice, issued by Advances in Human Biology (AIHB) in June, recognizes the case as “scientific misconduct.” The journal launched an investigation after the plagiarism was … Continue reading Journal blacklists authors for plagiarizing case report about hypersexuality in dementia
Cell Press has dismissed accusations of image manipulation in two well-cited papers. In June 2015, we reported that the publisher was investigating anonymous allegations of more than a dozen instances of manipulation of images in the papers published in Cell and Molecular Cell in 1999 and 2001, respectively. After assessing the original high-resolution versions of images from the laboratory notebook of … Continue reading Cell Press dismisses fraud allegations in high-profile genetics papers
The week at Retraction Watch saw news of a settled lawsuit, and had us celebrating our sixth anniversary with the announcement of a new partnership. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Last week, George Washington University (GWU), a private institution in Washington DC, settled a case with scientist Rakesh Kumar, who had claimed breach of contract and emotional distress following a misconduct investigation against him. But earlier this year, a judge dismissed another one of the scientist’s claims, after GWU argued it had the same “official immunity” … Continue reading Can universities claim immunity in misconduct lawsuits? What a recent ruling suggests