Search Results for: email fake

The three-year delay: Journal finally retracts paper based on made-up data

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

After 35 years, philosophy journal corrects article…by a cat

In 1982, Bruce Le Catt wrote a response to a paper in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy critiquing an earlier article about prosthetic vision. But Le Catt was no ordinary author. No, he was a cat, the beloved pet of David Lewis, a world-class philosopher who just happened to be the author of the article … Continue reading After 35 years, philosophy journal corrects article…by a cat

Nearly 500 researchers guilty of misconduct, says Chinese gov’t investigation

Four hundred eighty-six authors have been found guilty of misconduct by the Chinese government, the fall-out from a sweep of retractions by one journal earlier this year. In April, Tumor Biology retracted 107 papers that had been accepted based on faked reviews. Since many of the authors were based in China, the country’s Ministry of Science … Continue reading Nearly 500 researchers guilty of misconduct, says Chinese gov’t investigation

Weekend reads: Subscription journals doomed?; Are scientists most often wrong?; “Buxom grapefruits”

The week at Retraction Watch featured an update on a Harvard lab whose PI is subject to a restraining order by one of his grad students, and the retraction of a paper that used male-only pronouns. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Looking to avoid a bad lab? A new site wants to help

We’ve all heard horror stories of lab disputes that can quickly spin out of control. (Such as a graduate student obtaining a restraining order against his supervisor, which we covered earlier this year for Science.) Naturally, prospective students want to do their homework before committing to a particular laboratory or supervisor. A new website, QCist, … Continue reading Looking to avoid a bad lab? A new site wants to help

May the sting be with you: Another journal prank, too good to overlook

Yes, yes, we know: It’s easy to publish “fake” papers in journals and expose the inherent flaws of academic publishing. We’ve covered many such stings, but there are simply too many for us to cover all.  Still, occasionally one is just too clever to ignore. On Saturday, the pseudonymous blogger Neuroskeptic announced that they had … Continue reading May the sting be with you: Another journal prank, too good to overlook

Weekend reads: 10 rules for research misconduct; peer review’s black box; the rich get richer

The week at Retraction Watch featured authors making a difficult decision to retract once-promising findings about gliobastoma, and sanctions for a researcher in whose lab image manipulations were found. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Six-figure publishing bonuses; Google’s scientific influence campaign

The week at Retraction Watch featured the story of a group devastated to learn that they had used the wrong mice in their experiments, and the tale of how keycard swipe records gave away faked data. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

“We were devastated:” Authors retract paper after realizing they had used the wrong mice

Longtime readers of Retraction Watch may recall a 2011 post about a research team that retracted a paper after realizing that they had ordered the wrong mice. Maureen Gannon and Raymond Pasek of Vanderbilt University contacted us earlier this week to alert us to a similar case: Their retraction, earlier this month, of a 2016 paper … Continue reading “We were devastated:” Authors retract paper after realizing they had used the wrong mice