The week at Retraction Watch featured the launch of an award for doing the right thing, and a hijacked journal getting its name back. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Over the decades, the concept of peer review has changed dramatically – so what does the future hold? That’s a question examined in a new report issued today by BioMed Central and Digital Science, based on discussions held during the SpotOn London conference. (Disclosure: Our co-founder Ivan Oransky spoke there.) We spoke with Elizabeth Moylan, Senior … Continue reading Peer review in 2030: New report hopes it’s faster, more transparent, and more diverse
The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at how long journals take to respond to retraction requests, and news of a $10 million settlement for research misconduct allegations. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Last year, a researcher cast doubt on a bone scientist’s clinical trials, suggesting some of the findings may not be legitimate. So what’s happened since? Since 2015, journals have retracted 14 papers by bone researcher Yoshihiro Sato, based at Mitate Hospital in Japan, for issues ranging from self-plagiarism, to problems with data, to including co-authors without their consent. … Continue reading A shadow was cast on a bone researcher’s work. What are journals doing about his papers?
The week at Retraction Watch featured a new record for most retractions by a single journal, and an impassioned plea from a biostatistician for journals to clean up their act. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Some types of misconduct are obvious – most researchers would agree cooking data and plagiarizing someone’s work are clear no-nos. But what about overhyping your findings? Using funding allocated to an unrelated project, if it keeps a promising young student afloat? On these so-called “gray” areas of research behavior, people aren’t so clear what to … Continue reading “Ethical ambiguity:” When scientific misconduct isn’t black and white
The troubles continue for a bone researcher, who’s lost multiple papers in recent months due to problems ranging from data issues to including authors without their consent. Now, journals have retracted two more papers by Yoshihiro Sato. And in a sign of the downstream effects that fraud can have, another journal has retracted two meta-analyses by other … Continue reading Fraud by bone researcher takes down two meta-analyses, a clinical trial, and review
A leading physicist in India has lost four more papers for duplication, after colleagues lodged a complaint against him. According to the most recent retraction notices, issued by Applied Surface Science, the four papers duplicated several figures and portions of text from the authors’ previous works. Although the notices do not single out a responsible party, last year the … Continue reading Prominent physicist loses four more papers for duplication
A researcher is strongly objecting to a publisher’s decision to retract three of her papers from two computing journals without informing her first. The reason: Self-plagiarism, which the author said stemmed from her PhD student using similar descriptions for the background sections of the papers. She argued that if the reviewers had flagged the duplication, she … Continue reading Author surprised when publisher pulls three of her papers
A new report from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences panel urges the creation of a new, independent group to help tackle research misconduct and other practices that hurt the enterprise. The report also renames those problematic practices — such as “misleading statistical analysis that falls short of falsification,” awarding authorship to researchers who don’t deserve … Continue reading U.S. panel sounds alarm on “detrimental” research practices, calls for new body to help tackle misconduct