Retraction Watch

Which came first? Plagiarism flap forces retraction of chicken nugget paper

It never pays to take a closer look at the inside of a chicken nugget.

The journal Food Chemistry has retracted a 2010 article by Iranian researchers who claimed to have used spectroscopy to examine the inner workings of breaded-fried chicken nuggets. Trouble was, someone else had already done the work.

Issues with the paper first surfaced in March, in the form of a correction that should have given the editors serious indigestion: Continue reading Which came first? Plagiarism flap forces retraction of chicken nugget paper

Poignancy in physics: Retraction for “fatal error” that couldn’t be patched

In August of last year, Mladen Pavičić, chair of physics at the University of Zagreb’s Faculty of Civil Engineering, published a paper in Physical Review Letters on quantum teleportation, “Near-Deterministic Discrimination of All Bell States with Linear Optics.”

Just six days later, after hearing from a physicist in China, Pavičić — who is also affiliated with Harvard’s physics department — submitted a correction, which ran on the journal’s site in November. The correction begins: Continue reading Poignancy in physics: Retraction for “fatal error” that couldn’t be patched

Heart retracts stent-ReoPro paper over data dispute with authors (save one)

We’re a few months late on this one, but Heart, a BMJ title, issued a fascinating retraction notice in August about a meta-analysis on percutaneous coronary intervention (that’s stenting to you and me) after suffering a heart attack, and the drug abciximab, which is used to prevent clotting and additional near-term heart attacks. Abciximab is sold as ReoPro by Eli Lilly.

The article, “Clinical impact of intracoronary abciximab in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: an individual patient-data pooled analysis of randomised studies,” was published last May. But according to the retraction notice, the authors had neglected to include fresh data, already in the literature before their paper went live, that contradicted their overall findings.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Heart retracts stent-ReoPro paper over data dispute with authors (save one)

Going Dutch: Stapel inquiry eyes credulous colleagues, institution, prompts national soul search

Dutch investigators have released their final report into the case of Diederik Stapel, the social scientist and erstwhile faculty member at Tilburg University who fabricated data in 55 articles and book chapters. So far, 31 of Stapel’s published papers have been retracted — three others have expressions of concern — although more might follow.

In addition, 10 dissertations by students Stapel supervised were found to contain fraudulent data, although those students were cleared of any wrongdoing in the inquiry.

The report — and we’re going by rough translations here — found that Stapel’s colleagues and administrators seemed to accept his results at face value. Meanwhile, his high profile at Tilburg insulated him against initial rumblings about problems with his data. As the Dutch paper NRC Handelsblad reported: Continue reading Going Dutch: Stapel inquiry eyes credulous colleagues, institution, prompts national soul search

Odd: Retractions 18 and 19 for Dipak Das, and a new paper in the same journal, as if nothing were amiss

Dipak Das, the resveratrol researcher found guilty of more than 100 counts of misconduct by the University of Connecticut, has two more retractions for his resume. But that’s not the most interesting part of this post, so keep reading after the notices.

Both retractions appeared in the October 2012 issue of the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. Here’s the first notice: Continue reading Odd: Retractions 18 and 19 for Dipak Das, and a new paper in the same journal, as if nothing were amiss

Neuroscience paper retracted after HHMI investigation finds scientist copied images without permission

The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) asked a journal to retract a paper once it became clear that some of the images in it were actually from a different HHMI lab.

Here’s the notice, from the Journal of Comparative Neurology: Continue reading Neuroscience paper retracted after HHMI investigation finds scientist copied images without permission

Get the lead out: duplication leads to retraction of heavy metal paper

Biological Trace Element Research has retracted a paper by a group of Egyptian authors for duplication.

The paper, “The Effect of Lead Acetate Toxicity on Experimental Male Albino Rat,” came from investigators in the department of Economic Entomology and Pesticides at Cairo University and appeared in December 2011. As the notice states:

Article has been retracted due to duplicate publication.

Here’s the abstract: Continue reading Get the lead out: duplication leads to retraction of heavy metal paper

I will not plagiarize, I will not plagiarize, No plagiaré…: When a journal requires a public apology

This one is an oldie but a goodie.

We’ve published a few accounts of what it feels like to have your work plagiarized. But often absent from accounts like that are the views of the plagiarists. So here’s one.

In 2009, the Cuban Journal of Endocrinology retracted a 2000 paper by a researcher who acknowledged plagiarizing the work from a previously-published book chapter by other authors. And how.

As a letter from the editors explains (with the help of Google Translate): Continue reading I will not plagiarize, I will not plagiarize, No plagiaré…: When a journal requires a public apology