Comments on: Senior author “fully confident” in paper that cites retracted Cell study and shares first author http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/ Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Sun, 19 May 2013 10:31:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: gdsamIV http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-31737 Mon, 19 Nov 2012 02:42:07 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-31737 A little web reserach tells me that Dr. Marshall recieved a fairly lucrative PDF fellowship from “Alberta Innovates” when she joined the Grewal laboratory – undoubtably helped by the prestige of this fradulent Cell paper on her CV. What do do in this case? Does Alberta Innovates ask for the money back?

]]> By: JudyH http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-24041 Mon, 17 Sep 2012 03:56:12 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-24041 I think there was room for suspicion. As many commenters point out, when misbehavior is discovered in one paper, it often turns out that there are instances of misbehavior in other papers and/or at other institutions. Grewal himself seems to have thought the same thing, since he said he checked all the data and documentation as soon as he heard about the pending retraction of the other paper.

I see no accusation of wrongdoing, just a suggestion that something should be followed up, in light of the general trend of misconduct coming in a series rather than in isolated instances. And I think RW was doing its usual thorough job in following up.

If our aim is to discover truth, then scientists must be able to defend their results without getting insulted that anyone would doubt them.

]]> By: chirality http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-24009 Sun, 16 Sep 2012 19:09:49 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-24009 “I wonder what will happen to a new paper by Marshall et al. (2012):
http://www.nature.com/emboj/journal/v31/n8/full/emboj201233a.html
The retracted article is cited several times and uses as a support for conclusive remarks.
Damien
September 6, 2012 at 10:29 am”

Baseless? I would think so. Just because the two papers share an author, it does not mean both are bogus. Besides, Marshall must have been aware of the growing controversy surrounding the Cell paper, so she would have been insane to try to pull off the same trick again.

]]> By: Fernando Pessoa http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-23859 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 08:51:48 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-23859 In reply JudyH September 14, 2012 at 9:17 pm

Dear Judy you have got the right spirit.

]]> By: JudyH http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-23814 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 01:17:08 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-23814 Can you point me toward the baseless accusations that you mentioned? Thanks in advance.

]]> By: chirality http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-23722 Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:47:40 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-23722 In this case, it was most likely either an external or internal pressure to produce results worthy of a PhD (I am assuming Marshall was a PhD candidate at Glasgow). If the paper was fraudulent, so was the thesis, I would think. Something the Scots seem to gloss over.
On the other hand, Grewal should not have dignified the baseless accusations with an answer. Besides, Marshall by then had no incentive to fake results.

]]> By: littlegreyrabbit http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/senior-author-fully-confident-in-paper-that-cites-retracted-cell-study-and-shares-first-author/#comment-23681 Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:02:51 +0000 http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/?p=9717#comment-23681 Fair enough.
I think people will falsify data if
a. The neat idea they are supposed to prove isn’t actually true
b. They can’t master a technique or not reliably and either don’t know why they can’t master it or are just trying to cut some corners – for example not keeping good records.
As a junior post-doc, if the head of the group gave her a workable proposal, there is no reason to assume that someone would jump straight into falsification without at least seeing if they could get it work by, errrr, more orthodox methods.

]]>