Ask Retraction Watch: Is a t-test no longer publishable?

Photo by Bilal Kamoon via flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilal-kamoon/
Photo by Bilal Kamoon via flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/bilal-kamoon/

Another installment of Ask Retraction Watch:

Recently I heard a graduate student was told by their advisor, ‘Don’t do a t-test, it’s not publishable.’  This seems ridiculous to me as the t-test is a robust test to aid in answering a hypothesis.  So my question is: is a t-test no longer publishable?  And if so, is this true for higher tiered journals, or all peer-reviewed journals?

I would very much appreciate hearing the opinions of your readers on this issue – do they feel they need to run more ‘elaborate’ statistics (e.g., multivariate, modeling, etc.) in order for their research to be publishable?  And if so, do researchers knowingly violate the assumptions of these more elaborate statistical tests so they can be ‘publishable’?

Please take our poll, and comment below.

Irony alert: Forensic experts have paper retracted for plagiarism

ijmbrTime to roll out the irony meter again.

A group of scientists from Uttar Pradesh, India, who study forensic bioinformatics have had a paper retracted for something that can generally be detected with a specialized form of forensic software: Plagiarism.

Here’s the notice for Kumar Ajay, Singh Neetu, Gaurav S.S. “Forensic Bioinformatics: An innovative technological advancement in the field of Forensic Medicine and Diagnosis,” signed by O.A. Sofola, editor-in-chief: Continue reading Irony alert: Forensic experts have paper retracted for plagiarism

No, math prof, Google isn’t a proper literature search (and don’t plagiarize your dead mentor)

semigroupSometimes, it’s easiest and most straightforward if we just let retraction notices sink in before we comment on them.

Take this one from Semigroup Forum, signed by Chong-yih Wu of National Pingtung Institute of Commerce, Pingtung, Taiwan: Continue reading No, math prof, Google isn’t a proper literature search (and don’t plagiarize your dead mentor)

Retraction for authors of muscle paper who lifted data from their own 18-year-old article

janatFor the second time in a week, we’ve seen a journal retract a paper because it duplicated something in its own archive. Yesterday, it was a case of plagiarism in a plant journal. Today, we find that the Journal of Anatomy has retracted an article it published earlier this year by a group of Slovenian authors who took a page (or several) out of their 1995 article in the same periodical.

The article, “Muscles within muscles: a tensiomyographic and histochemical analysis of the normal human vastus medialis longus and vastus medialis obliquus muscles,” came from researchers in the department of orthopedic surgery at the University Medical Centre in Ljubjana. According to the abstract: Continue reading Retraction for authors of muscle paper who lifted data from their own 18-year-old article

He said, she said: Journal of Neuroscience expresses concern, but doesn’t pursue investigation

j neuroscienceThe Journal of Neuroscience‘s retraction notices often give us plenty to chew on, and a new Expression of Concern does the same.

In the notice — for a 16-year-old paper — the journal notes three cases of what certainly sounds like image manipulation, but carefully avoids calling it that: Continue reading He said, she said: Journal of Neuroscience expresses concern, but doesn’t pursue investigation

NEJM paper on sleep apnea retracted when original data can’t be found

nejmThe authors of a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine are retracting it, after being unable to find data supporting a table that required corrections.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading NEJM paper on sleep apnea retracted when original data can’t be found

Plant journal retracts paper for plagiarism — of another study in the same journal

s horticulturaeScientia Horticulturae, a plant journal published by Elsevier, has retracted a paper after realizing it was a graft of another that appeared in its pages.

Here’s the notice for “Water stress effects on Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) yield and oil essential components,” by Farshid Vazin, Islamic Azad University, Gonabad, Iran: Continue reading Plant journal retracts paper for plagiarism — of another study in the same journal

Image manipulation leads to fifth retraction for plant research group

plant scienceA plant scientist at the Colorado State University has retracted a fifth paper.

Here’s the notice for “Influence of ATP-binding cassette transporters in root exudation of phytoalexins, signals, and in disease resistance, a paper originally published in July 2012:

The Journal, Chief Editor and the Authors wish to retract the Original Research article cited above in its entirety. Based on information reported after publication, this article was found to have images that were inappropriately manipulated (Figure 1B: actin panel; Figure 6A: PR1, PR5; Figure 6B: AtATH6, AtATH10). The authors and the journal regret the errors and regret any inconvenience to the readers of Frontiers in Plant Science.

The last author of the now-retracted paper, Jorge Vivanco, has had four previous retractions, including one in Nature. He tells us: Continue reading Image manipulation leads to fifth retraction for plant research group

Data artifact claims two fruit fly papers from leading UK group — who offer model response

jcbcoverA team of researchers led by Daniel St. Johnston, director of the Gurdon Institute at Cambridge and a prominent developmental biologist in the UK, has lost a pair of articles after finding that their data were unreliable. But rather than “correct” the record with subsequent papers, they’ve withdrawn the problematic work.

To our mind, this is a poster case of doing the right thing by science. We think the notices — as provided by the authors and reported by the journals — pretty much say it all, so we’ll let them speak for themselves, followed by some details St. Johnston shared with us.

The first article, “LKB1 and AMPK maintain epithelial cell polarity under energetic stress,” appeared in 2007 in the Journal of Cell Biology and has been cited 108 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

According to the retraction notice:

Continue reading Data artifact claims two fruit fly papers from leading UK group — who offer model response

Off with his paper! Some authors want to retract claim to have identified Henry IV’s head

Henry IV, via Wikimedia
Henry IV, via Wikimedia

The BMJ is well-known for its annual Christmas issue, which New York Times medical correspondent Lawrence Altman calls

a lighter and sometimes brighter side of medicine, publishing unusual articles that vary from simply amusing to bizarre to creative or potentially important.

The 2010 issue was no exception, featuring a paper called “Multidisciplinary medical identification of a French king’s head (Henri IV)” in which: Continue reading Off with his paper! Some authors want to retract claim to have identified Henry IV’s head