A social psychology journal has added an expression of concern to a paper by prominent social psychologist Jens Förster, whose work has been subject to much scrutiny. This is the latest in a long-running saga involving Förster. The 2012 paper in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology had been flagged by a 2015 report describing … Continue reading Journal adds concern notice to paper by psychologist Jens Förster
In February 2016, Albert Jambon received some puzzling news. Several colleagues had alerted him to a paper, published online in late December 2015 in the Journal of African Earth Sciences (JAES), reporting the discovery of a rare mineral, which Jambon had been analyzing. When Jambon read the paper, he realized it was a modified version … Continue reading Researcher discovers paper published by co-author in another journal
A cardiology journal has retracted a 2016 meta-analysis after the editors had an, ahem, change of heart about the rigor of the study. The article, “Ivabradine as adjuvant treatment for chronic heart failure,” was published in the International Journal of Cardiology, an Elsevier title. The authors, a group at the Federal University of São Paulo, … Continue reading Reader complaints prompt retraction of meta-analysis of heart-failure drug
A journal is retracting a paper on the relative merits of one fertility procedure compared to another because the study never received ethical review or approval. In the paper, “Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection versus conventional intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a randomized controlled trial,” originally published Aug. 27, 2015 in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, the authors … Continue reading Fertility docs said their study didn’t need ethics review. An investigation said they were wrong.
The week at Retraction Watch featured a battle over psychologists and torture, a case of misconduct at Harvard, allegations of bribery, and a lawsuit against the New York Times. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Last year, Boris Ratnikov was reading a paper and saw a familiar image. He quickly realized: The image was from a 2012 paper he’d written, but wasn’t cited. The 2016 Cell Metabolism paper he was reading had copied a figure from his 2012 PLOS ONE paper without referencing it. In September 2016, Ratnikov, who is … Continue reading When is a citation not enough?
In 2014, researchers condemned the Spanish Government for “destroying the R&D horizon of Spain and the future of a complete generation” in the acknowledgment section of a paper about wireless networks. Three years later, the two last authors of the paper are protesting that protest, issuing a correction to alert readers that they did not … Continue reading Curious: A paper’s acknowledgments harshly criticized Spanish gov’t funding. Now two authors object.
The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at publishing bounties around the world, and the story of how the “right to be forgotten” law had led to a retraction. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a 35-year-old paper written by a cat, and the retraction of a study about a controversial gene editing technique. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Three years after an investigation revealed a 2013 paper was based on fraudulent data, a journal has finally retracted it. The paper, published in Journal of Hazardous Materials, was one of seven articles by a team at the Institute of Microbial Technology (IMTECH) in Chandigarh, India that contain fabricated data, according to an investigation by … Continue reading The three-year delay: Journal finally retracts paper based on made-up data