2012
DOI: 10.1038/490021a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Misconduct is the main cause of life-sciences retractions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0
5

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
15
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Publications can be retracted for various reasons-fortuitous research findings that cannot be replicated and editorial blunders that have resulted in duplicate publication of the same article [5,6]. More often than not, however, published articles are retracted for various forms of academic misconduct, for example, fabrication and falsification of data, plagiarism, and image manipulation [7][8][9]. Research suggests that misconduct as a reason for retractions has been gaining increasing prominence [10].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Publications can be retracted for various reasons-fortuitous research findings that cannot be replicated and editorial blunders that have resulted in duplicate publication of the same article [5,6]. More often than not, however, published articles are retracted for various forms of academic misconduct, for example, fabrication and falsification of data, plagiarism, and image manipulation [7][8][9]. Research suggests that misconduct as a reason for retractions has been gaining increasing prominence [10].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A few examples can give an idea about what draws the students' attention. In the fall 2012 class a student suggested a commentary in the Nature magazine (Corbyn 2012), which references a PNAS study documenting that most of the retractions in lifesciences journals are due to fraud and not errors (Fang et al 2012). Another student in the same class suggested a policy forum in the Science magazine, tackling the misalignment of regulations with ethical considerations in human research (Dressler 2012).…”
Section: Web Linksmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Bar polovina radova je povučena zbog naučnog nepoštenja (fabrikovanje, falsifikovanje, plagijarizam i autoplagijarizam). Najviše povučenih radova dolazi iz časopisa sa visokim impakt faktorom (IF), a od 2006-2010. godine raste i broj povučenih radova iz časopisa sa nižim IF [42,43].…”
Section: Kako Sprečiti Pojave Naučnog Nepoštenja?unclassified