Comments on: Korean cardiology journal retracts one paper for plagiarism, and another for duplication http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/korean-cardiology-journal-retracts-one-paper-for-plagiarism-and-another-for-duplication/ Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Tue, 21 May 2013 15:22:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: YouKnowBestOfAll http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/korean-cardiology-journal-retracts-one-paper-for-plagiarism-and-another-for-duplication/#comment-23154 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:46:30 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9595#comment-23154 Yes, fraudsters today are “smarter” – they carefully paraphrase and reshuffle the stolen material thinking that they can get away with it.

Congratulations to the Committee for Publication Ethics of KAMJE and the Editorial Board of KCJ for Doing-the-Right-Thing, i.e. for pointing out the plagiarism and consequently retracting the article.

]]> By: puzzled monkey (Conrad T Seitz MD) http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/korean-cardiology-journal-retracts-one-paper-for-plagiarism-and-another-for-duplication/#comment-23054 Thu, 06 Sep 2012 22:48:00 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9595#comment-23054 I like the fact that the journal articles involved are cited with complete references, in a footnote no less. Too bad the Protein and Peptide Journal couldn’t follow the same format when they retract an article (see next blog entry (heheh.))

]]>