The week at Retraction Watch featured doubts about the effects of oxytocin, aka the “love hormone,” and a report on how common reference errors are. Here’s what was happening elsewhere, with apologies for the later-than-usual posting:
The University of Cologne has conducted an investigation into the research of Tina Wenz, and determined that six papers should be pulled due to scientific misconduct. In a release issued last week (as first reported by Leonid Schneider), the university lists six papers that “present scientific misconduct,” according to our Google Translate. One of the six … Continue reading German university recommends that six papers be retracted following probe
An Elsevier journal has angered an author by removing his study without telling him. After spending months asking the journal why it removed the paper — about a heavily debated theorem in physics — and getting no response, the author threatened to seek damages from the journal and publisher for “permanently stigmatizing” his work. Yesterday, an Elsevier … Continue reading Physics journal retracts paper without alerting author
A researcher who was dismissed from Wayne State University — then lost a whistleblower lawsuit against it — has logged his first retraction. In 2012, after Christian Kreipke was dismissed from Wayne State, he filed a lawsuit, alleging that the institution had defrauded the U.S. government of $169 million in research funding. A judge dismissed the case in 2014, … Continue reading 1st retraction for researcher who lost whistleblower lawsuit
The last author of a 1999 paper has asked the journal to retract it less than one month after a user raised questions about images on PubPeer. Yesterday, last author Jim Woodgett posted a note on the site saying the author who generated the figures in question could not find the original data, and since … Continue reading Author asks to retract nearly 20-year old paper over figure questions, lack of data
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
Researchers have retracted a 2016 cancer study, citing discrepancies between the data and images presented in the paper. Although the retraction notice itself contains relatively little information, we’ve obtained a letter from the last author — Jun-Li Luo of The Scripps Research Institute in Jupiter, Florida — to the editor-in-chief of Cell Death and Differentiation that says … Continue reading Authors retract 2016 cancer study when data don’t align with figures
Consider this: Fragments of a PLOS ONE paper overlap with pieces of other publications. The authors used them without credit and without quotation marks. This sounds an awful lot like plagiarism — using PLOS‘s own standards, even. But the journal isn’t calling it plagiarism. They’ve labeled this an instance of “text overlap,” a spokesperson told us, based … Continue reading When does “overlap” become plagiarism? Here’s what PLOS ONE decided
Mario Saad, a diabetes researcher who once sued to stop a publisher from retracting his papers, has just received his eighth retraction. Critical Care has retracted a 2012 paper about treating sepsis, citing extensive similarities between figures within the paper and 10 others. Here’s the full notice for “Diacerhein attenuates the inflammatory response and improves … Continue reading Researcher who sued to stop retractions earns his 8th
A researcher at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio has retracted a second paper after a review found the figures didn’t match the original data. Last year, we reported on a previous retraction of a paper co-authored by biologist Alan Levine in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, which was pulled for the exact same reason; even … Continue reading Biologist loses second paper — again, for unvalidated figures