Search Results for: doing the right thing

NUS: Melendez committed “serious scientific misconduct,” but don’t expect to get any details

Alirio Melendez, a former National University of Singapore immunologist whose story we’ve been following here since a retraction in September of last year, committed misconduct on an “unprecedented” scale, according to the university, involving more than 20 papers. Nature’s Richard van Noorden has the scoop: After a 19-month investigation, the National University of Singapore (NUS) … Continue reading NUS: Melendez committed “serious scientific misconduct,” but don’t expect to get any details

Journal of Neuroscience retraction, typically opaque, from author with history of errors

The Journal of Neuroscience has retracted a 2011 paper by an international group of scientists, including the prominent Maryland researcher Ronald Dubner, but readers won’t know why. As the notice “explains“:

Going Dutch: Stapel inquiry eyes credulous colleagues, institution, prompts national soul search

Dutch investigators have released their final report into the case of Diederik Stapel, the social scientist and erstwhile faculty member at Tilburg University who fabricated data in 55 articles and book chapters. So far, 31 of Stapel’s published papers have been retracted — three others have expressions of concern — although more might follow. In … Continue reading Going Dutch: Stapel inquiry eyes credulous colleagues, institution, prompts national soul search

Five retractions for cancer research team for manipulated figures

The International Journal of Cancer, a Wiley title, has retracted a pair of articles from a group at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, for image manipulation. The papers, from the lab of Adi Gazdar, the W. Ray Wallace Distinguished Chair in Molecular Oncology Research who is known for his massive collection of human cancer … Continue reading Five retractions for cancer research team for manipulated figures

Retraction is final destination for epoxy paper marred by “pervasive misattribution of data”

The Journal of Vinyl and Additive Technology (JVAT) — the official journal of the Society of Plastics Engineers — is retracting a 2012 paper from a group of Chinese researchers who evidently realized at some point that they didn’t know quite what they were doing. As the notice explains:

Did a McLuhan moment lead to retraction in Chemistry — A European Journal?

The authors of a chemistry paper are retracting it after a Columbia University chemistry researcher pointed out a fatal misinterpretation of his own work in it. Here’s the notice in Chemistry — A European Journal:

Majority of retractions are due to misconduct: Study confirms opaque notices distort the scientific record

A new study out in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) today finds that two-thirds of retractions are because of some form of misconduct — a figure that’s higher than previously thought, thanks to unhelpful retraction notices that cause us to beat our heads against the wall here at Retraction Watch. The … Continue reading Majority of retractions are due to misconduct: Study confirms opaque notices distort the scientific record

A fistful of Stapels: Psych journal retracts five more from Dutch researcher, upping total to 25

Diederik Stapel’s CV continues to crumble, with five more retractions for the disgraced Dutch social scientist who admitted to fabricating data in his studies. The latest articles to fall appeared in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, a Sage title, bringing Stapel’s total to 25 that we’re aware of so far:

How can institutions prevent scientific misconduct?

There has been plenty of interest in scientific fraud and misconduct lately — and not just on Retraction Watch — from major news outlets and government agencies, among other parties. The rate of retractions is increasing, and some fraudsters are even setting new records. That has focused attention on how institutions can prevent misconduct — … Continue reading How can institutions prevent scientific misconduct?

Is misconduct more likely in drug trials than in other biomedical research?

A new paper by Chicago pharmacy researchers suggests that researchers performing drug studies are more likely to commit fraud than are their colleagues in the rest of biomedicine. In the paper, “Retraction Publications in the Drug Literature,” which appears in Pharmacotherapy, Jennifer C. Samp, Glen T. Schumock, and A. Simon Pickard take a look at … Continue reading Is misconduct more likely in drug trials than in other biomedical research?