Search Results for: mega-correction

Two more retractions appear for prominent MIT cancer researcher Robert Weinberg

Two identical retraction notices have popped up for MIT professor Robert Weinberg, a highly-cited cancer researcher who had a retraction and a correction in 2013, both in Cancer Cell.  These two new retractions, in Genes and Development, stem directly from another paper by Weinberg and colleagues in Cell that will apparently be retracted, as the “same analytical methodology was used,” … Continue reading Two more retractions appear for prominent MIT cancer researcher Robert Weinberg

Diabetes researcher won’t give up court fight to quash expressions of concern

Apparently, you can’t keep Mario Saad down. The researcher, who had 12 figures in a paper corrected this week, was dealt a setback last week when a judge denied his motion to remove expressions of concern on four of his papers in the journal Diabetes, saying that would have amounted to prior restraint — essentially, censorship … Continue reading Diabetes researcher won’t give up court fight to quash expressions of concern

Univ.: No misconduct, but “poor research practice” in mgt prof’s work now subject to 7 retractions

The Leadership Quarterly has retracted a trio of papers by Frederick Walumbwa, an “ethical leadership” guru at Florida International University, whose work has come under scrutiny for flawed methodology. And another journal  has pulled one of his articles for similar reasons. That brings his count – as far as we can tell — to seven retractions … Continue reading Univ.: No misconduct, but “poor research practice” in mgt prof’s work now subject to 7 retractions

Overly honest references: “Should we cite the crappy Gabor paper here?”

We never cease to be amazed what can make it through peer review and several levels of editing. In this case, some fish mating researchers wrote an, um, love note to their peers that failed to be edited out by any of the many eyes who must have at least glanced over it. Here’s our … Continue reading Overly honest references: “Should we cite the crappy Gabor paper here?”

Hepatology issues corrections in two papers from Pitt liver group

 A group of liver researchers from the University of Pittsburgh has earned a pair of corrections in Hepatology for image problems. The team was led by George K. Michalopoulos, chair of the department of pathology at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. One article, “Excessive hepatomegaly of mice with hepatocyte-targeted elimination of integrin linked kinase … Continue reading Hepatology issues corrections in two papers from Pitt liver group

Nature corrects a correction

Last year, we reported on a Nature correction of a paper for what a McGill University committee had earlier called “intentionally contrived and falsified” figures. It turns out that the correction — like the original paper — left some Nature readers puzzled, so the journal has run a correction of the correction:

Nature yanks controversial genetics paper whose co-author was found dead in lab in 2012

Nature has retracted a controversial 2012 paper by a group from Johns Hopkins University which has been the subject of a protracted public dispute. The article, “Functional dissection of lysine deacetylases reveals that HDAC1 and p300 regulate AMPK,” came from the lab of Jef Boeke,  a celebrated biochemist. But a former lab member, Daniel Yuan, … Continue reading Nature yanks controversial genetics paper whose co-author was found dead in lab in 2012

JBC issues correction for paper by Khachigian, who has had four others retracted

The Journal of Biological Chemistry has a fairly gory correction — we’d call it a mega-correction — for a 2010 paper by Levon Khachigian, an Australian researcher whose studies of a new drug for skin cancer recently were halted over concerns about possible misconduct, including image manipulation. As we reported earlier this year, Khachigian has … Continue reading JBC issues correction for paper by Khachigian, who has had four others retracted

Should science put up with sloppiness?

That’s the question we pose in our newest column in LabTimes, based on some recent cases we’ve covered: The implication seems to be that as long as researchers can pass off their mistakes as sloppiness, rather than intentional misconduct, they should be forgiven and carry on their work. We’re with that logic, to a point; … Continue reading Should science put up with sloppiness?

Anil Potti posts restored to Retraction Watch following false DMCA claim

As expected, ten Retraction Watch posts about Anil Potti that were mistakenly removed for a false Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice have been restored. Automattic, which runs WordPress, notified us tonight of the move, which comes two weeks after the original notice. The claim against Retraction Watch was ridiculous, of course; a site … Continue reading Anil Potti posts restored to Retraction Watch following false DMCA claim