Another busy week at Retraction Watch, including a ScienceOnline 2014 session Ivan facilitated on post-publication peer review. Here’s a selection of what was happening elsewhere on the web:
We have an update on the story of 120 bogus papers being removed by IEEE and Springer. The latter posted a statement earlier today, which we include in its entirety below:
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, featuring lots of snow at HQ and a trip to take part in a conference in Davis, California. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web:
Cancer Science, the journal of the Japanese Cancer Association, has retracted a 2012 article by a group of researchers because, well, it wasn’t clear who made up the group in the first place. The article, “Antitumor activity of human γδ T cells transducted with CD8 and with T-cell receptors of tumor-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes,” appeared … Continue reading Dispute with “unlisted author whose claim to authorship could not be solved” topples cancer paper
In December, we reported on the case of Dong-Pyou Han, who was found by the Office of Research Integrity to have spiked rabbit blood samples to make it look as though a vaccine for HIV was working. At the time, Han’s former institution, Iowa State, told us that “one oral presentation and some abstracts will … Continue reading Faked HIV vaccine research presentation retracted
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was going on around the web in scientific publishing and related issues: “The part of our paper that I [Conley] regret is our crazy biological interpretation. I don’t know what I was thinking or why reviewers didn’t spank me on that…” A wonderfully honest quote from a … Continue reading Weekend reads: One researcher resents “cyberbullying” while another wishes peer reviewers would spank him
The debate over the retraction of a highly controversial paper on the effects of GMOs on rats continues unabated. This week, Adriane Fugh-Berman and Thomas Sherman wrote on the Hastings Center website that
Researchers have retracted a fourth paper following an investigation at Cardiff University that found evidence of image manipulation by a researcher named Rossen Donev. Here’s the notice for “The mouse complement regulator CD59b is significantly expressed only in testis and plays roles in sperm acrosome activation and motility,” a paper first published in Molecular Immunology … Continue reading Fourth retraction results from Cardiff investigation
A bumper crop of material about misconduct, peer review, and related issues came to our attention this week, so without further ado:
Two researchers in Denmark are guilty of scientific dishonesty, the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD, Danish acronym UVVU) has concluded. In July, the DCSD said in a draft report that Bente Klarlund Pedersen had acted in a “scientifically dishonest” and “grossly negligent” manner. She — and many of her defenders — responded by saying … Continue reading Danish commitee finds Klarlund Pedersen, Penkowa guilty of scientific dishonesty