Diederik Stapel settles with Dutch prosecutors, won’t face jail time

stapel_npcDiederik Stapel, the former Tilburg University psychology professor who has retracted 53 papers because he made up the data, has settled with Dutch prosecutors, who began a criminal probe of his case last year.

Stapel will do 120 hours of community service, and decline disability and illness benefits that would have added up to 18 months’ worth of salary, according to reports in the Dutch press. Apparently, it helped his case that he had voluntarily given up his PhD.

A rough translation by a Retraction Watch reader: Continue reading Diederik Stapel settles with Dutch prosecutors, won’t face jail time

Come again? “Penile Strangulation by Metallic Rings” retracted for duplication

indjrnsurgThe Indian Journal of Surgery, a Springer-Verlag title, has retracted a 2011 paper with a title only the Marquis de Sade would love: “Penile Strangulation by Metallic Rings.”

We know what you’re saying: Who knew penises could be strangulated? Well, it’s true.

Continue reading Come again? “Penile Strangulation by Metallic Rings” retracted for duplication

Former Duke researcher charged with embezzlement has a paper retracted

j app physA new retraction notice in the Journal of Applied Physiology gives only a hint at the problems in the paper, but what it does say has led us to a story about one of its co-authors.

Here’s the notice, from a team at Duke: Continue reading Former Duke researcher charged with embezzlement has a paper retracted

Autism genetics papers retracted after fraud inquiry at NY research agency

GBBcoverA fraud investigation at a New York state research institution has led to two retractions of papers looking at genetic links to autism.

The 2011 papers, which appeared in Genes, Brain and Behavior, involve work conducted at the New York State Office for People With Developmental Disabilities’ (OPWDD’s) Institute for Basic Research in Developmental Disabilities, on Staten Island. The last author on both articles is Xiaohong Li, head of the institute’s cellular neurobiology laboratory.

Cell line mixup causes retraction of paper on blood vessel damage

britjournnutWe’ve written before about retractions for cell lines that turn out not to be what researchers thought they were. In a few cases, that has involved contamination by HeLa cells, named for Henrietta Lacks. Today, we note the retraction of a paper whose authors, from Taiwan, thought they were using human muscle cells that line blood vessels when they were actually studying such cells from rat embryos.

Here’s the notice in the British Journal of Nutrition for “Molecular mechanism of green microalgae, Dunaliella salina, involved in attenuating balloon injury-induced neointimal formation”: Continue reading Cell line mixup causes retraction of paper on blood vessel damage

Cost-sharing paper that shared too much with other works earns retraction

hepThe journal Higher Education Policy has retracted an article it published last year by a scholar in Ethiopia whose grasp of publishing policy seems pretty shaky.

The article, “Financing Higher Education in Ethiopia: Analysis of Cost-Sharing Policy and its Implementation,” which appeared online in August 2012, was by Sewale Abate Ayalew, of Bahir Dar University College of Business and Economics.

According to the retraction notice:
Continue reading Cost-sharing paper that shared too much with other works earns retraction

Duplication forces retraction of genomics paper

biosA group of biologists has lost a paper about a genomics tool after they published the findings twice.

Here’s the notice for the now-retracted paper in BIOS: Continue reading Duplication forces retraction of genomics paper

How well do journals publicize retractions?

bmc research notesA new paper in BMC Research Notes looks at the retraction class of 2008, and finds journals’ handling of them less than optimal.

Evelynne Decullier and colleagues — including Hervé Maisonneuve, who was helpful to us for a recent post — found: Continue reading How well do journals publicize retractions?

We know why the caged dimers sing: They’re being retracted

jacsat_v135i024.inddHere’s a good example of a retraction done the right way (we think).

The Journal of the American Chemical Society has retracted — at the behest of the principal investigator  — a 2008 article by a group of researchers whose subsequent studies undermined their confidence in the validity of their initial findings.

The article was titled “Cooperative melting in caged dimers of rigid small molecule DNA-hybrids,” and it came from the lab of SonBinh Nguyen, of Northwestern University. As the paper’s abstract stated:
Continue reading We know why the caged dimers sing: They’re being retracted

Authors of retracted sex paper won Ig Nobel for MRI study of coitus — and had another retraction

bmj mri
Midsagittal image of the anatomy of sexual intercourse, from BMJ http://bit.ly/v2ZkxQ

Yesterday we reported on the retraction for data misuse and plagiarism of a 21-year-old paper on sex and female cancer patients. Turns out we missed a couple of rather interesting details about the authors of the pulled article.

One tidbit, for example, is that one of them, Willibrord Weijmar Schultz,  is science royalty, having been a member of a team that won the 2000 Ig Nobel prize in medicine. Their heralded study, “Magnetic resonance imaging of male and female genitals during coitus and female sexual arousal,” published in 1999 in the BMJ: An inside-the-MRI look at the human body having sex. Continue reading Authors of retracted sex paper won Ig Nobel for MRI study of coitus — and had another retraction