Search Results for: plagiarism

Weekend reads: Why more papers should be retracted; predictors of “grateful” acknowledgements; multi-million dollar settlement for fake rankings data

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a new entry on our leaderboard; a third retraction for … Continue reading Weekend reads: Why more papers should be retracted; predictors of “grateful” acknowledgements; multi-million dollar settlement for fake rankings data

Weekend reads: How one scientist polluted the literature; a dog earns an authorship; poisoning in the lab

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a retraction that took three years even after the university … Continue reading Weekend reads: How one scientist polluted the literature; a dog earns an authorship; poisoning in the lab

Rabbits don’t even have canines, but this group tried to pass off rabbit teeth as dog teeth

As any kid knows, Snoopy is a laconic beagle and Bugs Bunny is a mouth-running rabbit. The difference is pretty clear, right? Evidently not. A group of researchers in China have lost a 2017 paper in Medical Science Monitor for trying to pass off cellular images of rabbit teeth as those of beagles. According to … Continue reading Rabbits don’t even have canines, but this group tried to pass off rabbit teeth as dog teeth

Which kind of peer review is best for catching fraud?

Is peer review a good way to weed out problematic papers? And if it is, which kinds of peer review? In a new paper in Scientometrics, Willem Halffman, of Radboud University, and Serge Horbach, of Radboud University and Leiden University, used our database of retractions to try to find out. We asked them several questions about … Continue reading Which kind of peer review is best for catching fraud?

Is it time for a new classification system for scientific misconduct?

Are current classification systems for research misconduct adequate? Toshio Kuroki — special advisor to the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science and professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo and Gifu University — thinks the answer is no. In a new paper in Accountability in Research, Kuroki — who has published on research misconduct before … Continue reading Is it time for a new classification system for scientific misconduct?

Weekend reads: Prominent doctors who don’t disclose conflicts, and the journals that enable them; a “nudge” study faces scrutiny

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured two new names on our leaderboard, vindication for The Joy … Continue reading Weekend reads: Prominent doctors who don’t disclose conflicts, and the journals that enable them; a “nudge” study faces scrutiny

Authors try to duplicate bad data, fail miserably

We’ve seen plagiarizers plagiarizing plagiarizers, but here’s what seems to be a first: A journal has retracted an article that duplicated text…from a paper that had been retracted for containing dubious data. The Journal of Applied Pharmaceutical Science published the recycled paper, titled “Development and in vitro-in vivo characterization of chronomodulated multi-particulate drug delivery system of … Continue reading Authors try to duplicate bad data, fail miserably

A colleague included plagiarized material in your grant proposal. Are you liable?

Last month, a judge recommended that a former University of Kansas Medical Center professor be banned from Federal U.S. funding for two years. The ban came after an investigation showed that the researcher, Rakesh Srivastava, had submitted a grant application that was heavily plagiarized from someone else’s. But there’s far more to the case, as … Continue reading A colleague included plagiarized material in your grant proposal. Are you liable?

Weekend reads: Meet journals’ research integrity czars; Duke set to settle big grant fraud case; what a cannabis stock’s collapse can teach investors

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured some big numbers: 26 retractions for an engineer in Italy, … Continue reading Weekend reads: Meet journals’ research integrity czars; Duke set to settle big grant fraud case; what a cannabis stock’s collapse can teach investors

Legal threats, opacity, and deceptive research practices: A look at more than 100 retractions in business and management

What can studying retractions in business and management journals tell us? Earlier this year, Dennis Tourish, of the University of Sussex, and Russell Craig, of the University of Portsmouth, both in the UK, published a paper in the Journal of Management Inquiry that analyzed 131 such retractions. The duo — who were also two of … Continue reading Legal threats, opacity, and deceptive research practices: A look at more than 100 retractions in business and management