Researcher issues massive changes to papers amidst plagiarism investigation

A researcher in Greece has issued extensive — what we sometimes call “mega” — corrections to two 2016 papers published in a medical journal in Romania. The first author — Alexandra Kalogeraki, a pathology researcher at the University of Crete in Greece — retracted two reviews from the same journal last year for plagiarism. The newest notices … Continue reading Researcher issues massive changes to papers amidst plagiarism investigation

Weekend reads: Sugar paper tussle at a reunion; “Sex, lies, and video-taped experiments;” p-value harm?

The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a psychology paper because of manipulation by an unnamed graduate student, and a tale about the cost of being a whistleblower, even when you’re successful. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Whistleblower gets court backing in defamation case — but at a cost

It’s been a long and winding road for a whistleblower at Indiana University, South Bend. After Mark Fox, a professor of management and entrepreneurship accused two business professors of plagiarism in 2012, a university investigation found one of the two men — Douglas Agbetsiafa, the former chair of the economics department — guilty of plagiarism, and … Continue reading Whistleblower gets court backing in defamation case — but at a cost

How did a book chapter end up with two authors who didn’t contribute to it?

An erratum for a book chapter about water pollution has removed two out of the three original authors.  What’s more, the notice specifies that “any mistakes or omissions are the sole responsibility” of the remaining author, Michael Yodzis of the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada.  This isn’t something we see every day, but one … Continue reading How did a book chapter end up with two authors who didn’t contribute to it?

Do you calculate if you should accept an invite to peer review? Please stop, say journal editors

Scientists are always pressed for time; still, Raphael Didham of the University Western Australia was surprised when he fell upon a group of early career scientists using a spreadsheet formula to calculate whether one was obligated to accept an invitation to review a paper, based on how many manuscripts he’d submitted for review. “I recall … Continue reading Do you calculate if you should accept an invite to peer review? Please stop, say journal editors

If you use this research tool without permission, you’ll hear about it

Sometimes, a seemingly run-of-the-mill retraction notice turns out to be much less straightforward. Such was the case with a recent retraction of a 2016 paper in a journal published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, apparently over permission to use an evaluation scale designed to test whether patients take their medications as … Continue reading If you use this research tool without permission, you’ll hear about it

Why don’t women peer review as often as men? Fewer invites and RSVPs, researchers say

Women don’t peer review papers as often as men, even taking into account the skewed sex ratio in science – but why? In a new Comment in today’s Nature, Jory Lerback at the University of Utah and Brooks Hanson at the American Geophysical Union (AGU) confirmed the same trend in AGU journals, which they argue … Continue reading Why don’t women peer review as often as men? Fewer invites and RSVPs, researchers say

Authors retract two statin papers, one with problems “too extensive to revise”

Researchers in China have retracted two 2016 papers about the possible use of a cholesterol-lowering agent to treat bleeding on the brain. One of the retracted papers in the Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS) had multiple problems that were “too extensive to revise,” according to the lengthy retraction notice, relating to issues with authorship, data analyses, … Continue reading Authors retract two statin papers, one with problems “too extensive to revise”

The Retraction Watch 2016 year in review — and a sneak peek at our database

It’s been another exciting year for us at Retraction Watch. As always, there has been more to cover than we have time for. At the same time, we’ve expanded our efforts in other media, telling bigger stories and offering more analysis. And we’ve made major progress on our database — more on that in a … Continue reading The Retraction Watch 2016 year in review — and a sneak peek at our database

Judge tosses case, saying that court-ordered retractions are not part of scientific publication

“Retractions are part and parcel of academic and scientific publication. Court ordered retractions are not.” So ends a judge’s September 30, 2016 opinion dismissing a case brought in 2014 by Andrew Mallon, a former Brown University postdoc, alleging that his advisor and former business partner, John Marshall, had published a paper in 2013 in PLOS Biology that should … Continue reading Judge tosses case, saying that court-ordered retractions are not part of scientific publication