Search Results for: opaque

And the award for the most self-referential abstract ever goes to…

Here at Retraction Watch, we like to dig for what lies behind sometimes opaque retraction notices. But today, thanks to Neil Martin, we have a glimpse into something a bit different: The back-and-forth between an author and his editor. In Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, Peter Reiner, of the University of British Columbia, wrote a comment on … Continue reading And the award for the most self-referential abstract ever goes to…

A model retraction in the Journal of Neurochemistry for “unexpected effect” of a filter

They say that a poor workman blames his tools. If you’re a scientist and you discover your tools don’t do exactly what you thought they did, however, the right thing to do is let other scientists relying on your work know. That’s what the University of Auckland’s Nigel Birch and colleagues did recently, after a … Continue reading A model retraction in the Journal of Neurochemistry for “unexpected effect” of a filter

Another win for transparency: JBC takes a step forward, adding details to some retraction notices

Retraction Watch readers may recall that we have been frequent critics of the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) — published by the American Society for Biochemistry & Molecular Biology (ASBMB) — for their opaque retraction notices. Such notices often read simply “This article has been withdrawn by the authors.” But we are — despite what … Continue reading Another win for transparency: JBC takes a step forward, adding details to some retraction notices

Is an “article in press” “published?” A word about Elsevier’s withdrawal policy

Earlier today, we reported on the withdrawal of a paper from Research Policy, an Elsevier journal. The notice didn’t give a reason, just that the “article has been withdrawn at the request of the authors and editor.” We’ve seen a number of such opaque withdrawals from Elsevier journals, and thought it was worth some exploration. … Continue reading Is an “article in press” “published?” A word about Elsevier’s withdrawal policy

Not in my journal: Two editors take stock of misconduct in their fields — and don’t find much

Today brings two journal editorials about misconduct and retractions. They take, if we may, a bit of an optimistic and perhaps even blindered approach. In an editorial titled “Scientific misconduct occurs, but is rare,” Boston University’s Richard Primack, editor of Biological Conservation, highlights a Corrigendum of a paper by Jesus Angel Lemus, the veterinary researcher … Continue reading Not in my journal: Two editors take stock of misconduct in their fields — and don’t find much

Have you been involved in scientific fraud? Grant Steen wants to hear from you

Regular Retraction Watch readers may find the name Grant Steen familiar. Steen has published a number of important papers on retractions, most recently in PNAS. Recently, he approached us for help with what sounds like another project that is likely to increase our understanding of misconduct in science: Steen wants to gather the stories of … Continue reading Have you been involved in scientific fraud? Grant Steen wants to hear from you

Are men more likely to commit scientific fraud?

Regular Retraction Watch readers may have noticed that many of the people whose fraud we write about are men. Certainly, the top retraction earners — Yoshitaka Fujii, Joachim Boldt, Diederik Stapel, and Naoki Mori, to name a few — all have a Y chromosome. But that doesn’t necessarily mean our sample size is representative. Now … Continue reading Are men more likely to commit scientific fraud?

Catching up: OSU “missed fraud,” Dipak Das lost tenured professorship, Ivan on NPR’s Science Friday

We have a few follow-ups from stories we’ve recently covered: Terry Elton case initially chalked up to “disorganization,” not misconduct Ohio State University (OSU), which along with the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) recently sanctioned a pharmacy professor for image manipulation, “failed at first to recognize his deception,” according to an investigation by The Columbus Dispatch … Continue reading Catching up: OSU “missed fraud,” Dipak Das lost tenured professorship, Ivan on NPR’s Science Friday

Irony? Paper by author whose attorneys sent cease-and-desist letter to Science Fraud retracted

A Brazilian author whose attorneys were the first to send the now-shuttered Science Fraud site a cease-and-desist letter has now had a paper retracted. As Retraction Watch readers may know, Science Fraud shut down earlier this week in response to legal threats. Those threats were preceded by a cease-and-desist letter last month from attorneys for … Continue reading Irony? Paper by author whose attorneys sent cease-and-desist letter to Science Fraud retracted

RNA paper retracted for “carelessness in including some of the figures”

Here at Retraction Watch, we’ve covered retractions for misconduct, journal errors, editorial system hacking and even no particular reason. And that’s just in the last week. However, we’ve identified a new reported reason: carelessness. A paper in Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry claimed to show how a tiny RNA causes fat cells to die. Instead, the … Continue reading RNA paper retracted for “carelessness in including some of the figures”