The week at Retraction Watch featured news that one in 25 papers in a massive screen includes inappropriate image manipulation, and of the eighth and ninth retractions for a neuroscience team. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Journals have retracted two papers after realizing that they contain “nearly identical” abstracts and introductions, published only months apart. The two retracted papers, along with a third that also contains similar text, all conclude that a certain polymorphism could signal a risk for coronary artery disease among Chinese people, though each paper presents different data. … Continue reading Journals retract two heart papers with “nearly identical” abstracts
Elisabeth Bik, a microbiologist at Stanford, has for years been a behind-the-scenes force in scientific integrity, anonymously submitting reports on plagiarism and image duplication to journal editors. Now, she’s ready to come out of the shadows. With the help of two editors at microbiology journals, she has conducted a massive study looking for image duplication … Continue reading One in 25 papers contains inappropriately duplicated images, screen finds
The British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (BJCP) has retracted a 2015 paper about treating heart failure after deciding its peer review process had been compromised. This paper is one of the many we’ve noticed lately that have been felled by the actions of a “third party” — in this case, a manuscript editing company called … Continue reading Pharmacology journal pulls paper because third party “compromised” peer review
How easy is it to change people’s minds? In 2014, a Science study suggested that a short conversation could have a lasting impact on people’s opinions about gay marriage – but left readers disappointed when it was retracted only months later, after the first author admitted to falsifying some of the details of the study, … Continue reading “Science advances incrementally:” Researchers who debunked gay canvassing study move field forward
A researcher formerly based at the National Cancer Institute has earned three new retractions following an investigation that found she committed misconduct. In May of last year, Stephanie Watkins, who now works at Loyola Medicine, earned one two retraction, which mentions a review by an investigation committee at the National Institutes of Health. Two of the new notes, published in … Continue reading Cancer researcher earns 3 more retractions following NIH misconduct investigation
A philosophy journal that focuses on the teachings of philosopher Alain Badiou has apparently fallen victim to yet another Sokal hoax, and has retracted a fake article submitted by authors trying to expose the publication’s weaknesses. The paper, “Ontology, Neutrality and the Strive for (non-)Being-Queer,” attributed to Benedetta Tripodi of the Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza in … Continue reading Philosophy journal spoofed, retracts hoax article
Today colleges and universities face a crisis of accountability in two domains: scientific misconduct and sexual harassment or assault. Scientific misconduct and sexual harassment/assault are obviously different, but the way they are reported, handled, and play out have many similarities. Michael Chwe at the University of California in Los Angeles has been thinking about this for … Continue reading Scientific misconduct and sexual harassment: Similar problems with similar solutions?
This week at Retraction Watch featured an unusual excuse for missing data, and a guilty plea in court for misconduct. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Ever wonder how editors figure out whether a paper should be corrected, retracted, or left as-is? For a window into that crucial decision-making process, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) publishes a number of anonymized cases per year, in which they weigh in on a dilemma faced by a journal editor. The organization has weighed … Continue reading What happens before a retraction? A behind-the-scenes look from COPE