After reviewing nearly 20 years of retractions from researchers based in China, researchers came up with some somewhat unsurprising (yet still disheartening) findings: The number of retractions has increased (from zero in 1997 to more than 150 in 2016), and approximately 75% were due to some kind of misconduct. (You can read more details in … Continue reading 20 years of retractions in China: More of them, and more misconduct
The University of Copenhagen has stripped Milena Penkowa of her doctoral degree, after determining she had covered up problems with her research. According to a release issued today by the university, Penkowa falsified documents to allay suspicions that she had not performed some animal experiments as she’d reported. This development is the latest in a … Continue reading Copenhagen revokes degree of controversial neuroscientist Milena Penkowa
The week at Retraction Watch featured a battle over psychologists and torture, a case of misconduct at Harvard, allegations of bribery, and a lawsuit against the New York Times. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
A computer science journal has retracted two papers, after discovering “a conflict of interest between the handling editor and one of the authors.” Matt Hodgkinson, head of research integrity at Hindawi Limited, which publishes the journal Scientific World Journal, told us that the conflict of interest stemmed from the fact that Zheng Xu, an author … Continue reading “We would now catch” this conflict of interest: Hindawi journal retracts two papers
“Common wisdom,” according to the authors of a new piece in Nature, “assumes that the hazard of predatory publishing is restricted mainly to the developing world.” But the authors of the new paper, led by David Moher of the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, found that more than half — 57% — of the 2,000 articles … Continue reading Predatory journals: Not just a problem in developing world countries, says new Nature paper
The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper from Yale on ketamine and depression, a retraction for Carlo Croce, and a discussion of when a citation may not be enough. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The week at Retraction Watch featured the revocation of a PhD, a questionable way to boost university rankings, and a look at what editors should do when a researcher known to have committed misconduct submits a new manuscript. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper linked to vaccines, and what happens when a journal retracts 107 papers at once. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
A recent pre-print showed that scientists in China can earn up to $165,000 to publish a paper in a top journal, but that’s not the only place where researchers can get some extra cash. Recently, we conducted an informal search for other institutions around the world that offer cash prizes for publishing research — and … Continue reading Paid to publish: It’s not just China
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