Search Results for: elsevier

Former postdoc threatens Retraction Watch with lawsuit over vague defamation claims

In April 2012, we wrote about a case of disputed authorship and misused data involving one Varun Kesherwani, a former postdoc at the University of Nebraska. As we reported then, Kesherwani was first author of a paper in Cytokine. The second author, Ajit Sodhi, of Banaras Hindu University, claimed to have had no knowledge of … Continue reading Former postdoc threatens Retraction Watch with lawsuit over vague defamation claims

Non-renewable resource: Fuel yanks paper for duplication

Fuel, an Elsevier title, has pulled an article on coal pollution because the authors took much of the work from an earlier paper of theirs in another journal. The article, “Co-firing of coal and biomass: Development of a conceptual model for ash formation prediction,” was published in September by a group from Australia and The … Continue reading Non-renewable resource: Fuel yanks paper for duplication

PubPeer Selections: More questions about stem cells, price-shopping access charges

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:

The Peer Review Scam: How authors are reviewing their own papers

Yesterday, we reported on the discovery by BioMed Central that there were about 50 papers in their editorial system whose authors had recommended fake peer reviewers. Those “reviewers” had submitted reviews of a number of manuscripts, and five of the papers had been published. (BMC posted a blog examining the case this morning.) For some … Continue reading The Peer Review Scam: How authors are reviewing their own papers

Weekend reads: Novartis fires scientist for faking data; journal accepts F-bomb-laden spam paper

The week at Retraction Watch began with a case of a South Korean engineer who had to retract ten studies at once. Here’s what was happening elsewhere, along with an update on a story we covered a few days ago:

‘‘I don’t take whores in taxis”: Casual sexism in scientific journal leads to editor’s note

The Elsevier journal Biological Conservation has put out an apology, but not a retraction, after outcry over a bizarre, misogynistic non sequitur in a book review by Duke conservation biologist Stuart Pimm. Here’s the introduction to Pimm’s review of Keeping the Wild: Against the Domestication of Earth, which went online in October ahead of its December print publication:

Journal retracts paper when authors refuse to pay page charges

Taylor & Francis has withdrawn a paper published online after a disagreement with the authors about page charges. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Judit Dobránszki, Jean Carlos Cardoso, and Songjun Zeng had submitted the manuscript, “Genetic transformation of Dendrobium,” to GM Crops and Food: Biotechnology in Agriculture and the Food Chain earlier this year. It was … Continue reading Journal retracts paper when authors refuse to pay page charges

Weekend reads: Speed kills in publishing too; studying blank pages; apologies for the Rosetta Shirt

Highlights at Retraction Watch this week included a case of overly honest referencing and the story of how a medical resident flagged up a pseudoscientific study. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

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

Will journal finally retract fraudulent paper 10 months after an official request?

Elsevier journal Chemosphere may finally retract a paper it learned contained fabricated data in January when a member of the author’s institution requested the paper be retracted. The paper has been cited at least once since the lies came to light, as we reported earlier this month. The journal contacted the relevant parties on October 29 with the … Continue reading Will journal finally retract fraudulent paper 10 months after an official request?