Search Results for: plagiarism

First retraction appears for embattled food researcher Brian Wansink

Earlier this month, a high-profile food researcher who’s recently come under fire announced a journal was retracting one of his papers for duplication. Today, a retraction appeared — for a 2002 study which contained “major overlap,” according to the journal. The Journal of Sensory Studies has retracted a paper by Cornell’s Brian Wansink about how labeling of foods can affect … Continue reading First retraction appears for embattled food researcher Brian Wansink

Weekend reads: When reproducibility is weaponized; Internet-based paraphrasing tools; go parasites!

The week at Retraction Watch featured a predatory journal sting involving a fake disorder from Seinfeld, and a study with disturbing findings about how retracted papers are cited. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Cornell finds mistakes — not misconduct — in papers by high-profile nutrition researcher

An internal review by Cornell University has concluded that a high-profile researcher whose work has been under fire made numerous mistakes in his work, but did not commit misconduct. In response, the researcher — Brian Wansink — announced that he has submitted four errata to the journals that published the work in question. Since the … Continue reading Cornell finds mistakes — not misconduct — in papers by high-profile nutrition researcher

Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch lifted from earlier works in his scholarly papers: Report

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch appears to have borrowed material from multiple authors in his 2006 book, according to a new analysis by Politico. This week, U.S. lawmakers are going head-to-head over the nomination of Gorsuch to the highest court in the land. Although the book is only one snippet of Gorsuch’s vast portfolio … Continue reading Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch lifted from earlier works in his scholarly papers: Report

Most citations to retracted papers don’t note they’re problematic, authors say

We’ve known for a while that too many researchers cite retracted papers. But in what context do those citations occur? Are some authors citing a retracted paper as an example of problematic findings, or do most citing authors treat the findings as legitimate, failing to realize they are no longer valid? In a new paper … Continue reading Most citations to retracted papers don’t note they’re problematic, authors say

Weekend reads: What’s the real rate of misconduct?; research parasites win awards; preprints’ watershed moment

The week at Retraction Watch featured the strange story of a reappearing retracted study, and the retraction of a study showing a link between watching violent cartoons and verbal skills. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Cancer org bestows award on scientist under investigation

This month hasn’t been all bad for Carlo Croce. Despite issuing two corrections and being the subject of a lengthy New York Times article about how he’s dodged misconduct accusations for years (prompting his institution to re-open an investigation), Croce is now the recipient of a prestigious award from the American Association for Cancer Research. In a recent … Continue reading Cancer org bestows award on scientist under investigation

Authors who retract for honest error say they aren’t penalized as a result

Are there two types of retractions? One that results from a form of misconduct, such as plagiarism or manipulating figures, and another that results from “honest errors,” or genuine mistakes the authors have owned up to? More and more research is suggesting that the community views each type very differently, and don’t shun researchers who … Continue reading Authors who retract for honest error say they aren’t penalized as a result

Weekend reads: The risks of spotlighting reproducibility; harassment = scientific misconduct?; trouble with funnel plots

The week at Retraction Watch featured the case of a peer review nightmare, and a story about harassment by a would-be scientific critic. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

“It’s been three tough years:” Macchiarini whistleblower cleared of previous charges

Karl-Henrik Grinnemo was worried. The doctor and clinical researcher at the Karolinska Institute was working with a high-profile surgeon who was performing a potentially life-saving procedure on patients, but Grinnemo saw that the patients weren’t doing very well. So in 2013, Grinnemo and three other doctors raised concerns about the work of Paolo Macchiarini. The … Continue reading “It’s been three tough years:” Macchiarini whistleblower cleared of previous charges