ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact text matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research integrity
Filter by Categories
Human Research Ethics

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch Misconduct

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

(US) This Researcher Exploited Prisoners, Children, and the Elderly. Why Does Penn Honor Him? – The Chronicle of Higher Education (Alexander Kafka, | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on December 29, 2019
 

Albert M. Kligman was a larger-than-life dermatologist and entrepreneur instrumental in inventions that brought riches to him and his university. He also performed torturous experiments.

Over the last 12 years we have shared a few pieces about egregious ethical breaches, but we aren’t sure what stunned us most, what was done to those vulnerable Americans or that the track record of the lead researcher is still being celebrated.

“An outstanding clinician, researcher, and educator.” “A visionary leader” who led “an extraordinary life.” That’s how the University of Pennsylvania describes Albert M. Kligman on a fund-raising page for a lectureship in his name. He is also honored by not one but two chaired professorships.
.

What the university calls his “pioneering work with Retin-A” was estimated by a student turned critic of Kligman, Bernard Ackerman, as generating in the “many tens of millions.” Kligman himself once described to a television interviewer the sales of the acne medicine as an “explosion …a very considerable sum of money that comes to our department in the form of royalties. We are swimming in cash.”
.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

(Europe) Psychology researcher committed misconduct, says university – Retraction Watch (Adam Marcus | December 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on December 24, 2019
 

A Dutch university has found a former psychology researcher at the institution guilty of misconduct for several offenses, including lack of ethics approval for some of her studies and fabricating results in grant applications.

In a Nov. 11, 2019, report, officials at the University of Leiden stated that the researcher, whom it does not identify, violated academic integrity in the following ways:

(1) research with blood samples taken from test subjects without the approval of the Medical Ethical Committee (METC), (2) negligence in listing co-authors, (3) data manipulation, and (4) submitting grant applications with incorrect (incomplete and manipulated) research data. 

Read the rest of this discussion piece

(UK) King’s College London’s enquiry into Hans J Eysenck’s ‘Unsafe’ publications must be properly completed (Papers: David F Marks & Roderick D. Buchanan & Roderick D. Buchanan | December 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on December 23, 2019
 

Abstract
This journal recently drew attention to an extensive body of highly questionable research published by Hans J. Eysenck in collaboration with Ronald Grossarth-Maticek. The subsequent enquiry by King’s College London concluded that 26 publications were unsafe and warranted retraction. However, the enquiry reviewed only a subset of the 61 questionable publications initially submitted to them, only those Eysenck co-authored with Grossarth-Maticek. The enquiry excluded publications where Eysenck was the sole author. The King’s College London enquiry must be properly completed. They have a pressing responsibility to re-convene and broaden their review to include all Eysenck’s publications based on the same body of research – including an additional 27 publications recently uncovered. The unsatisfactory nature of the KCL review process makes the case for a National Research Integrity Ombudsperson even stronger.

Keywords
enquiry, fraud, H J Eysenck, King’s College London, personality, smoking, unsafe papers

Marks, D. F., & Buchanan, R. D. (2019). King’s College London’s enquiry into Hans J Eysenck’s ‘Unsafe’ publications must be properly completed. Journal of Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105319887791
Editorial (Open Access): https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1359105319887791

‘A long and lonely process:’ Whistleblowers in a misconduct case speak out – Retraction Watch (Ivan Oransky | )0

Posted by Admin in on December 16, 2019
 

Last week, we reported on a case at the University of Leiden in which the institution found that a former psychology researcher there had committed research misconduct. In the anonymized report — which we were able to confirm regarded Lorena Colzato, who is listed as a faculty member at Ruhr University in Bochum and at TU Dresden — the university found a lack of ethics approval for some studies and fabricating results in some grant applications. We asked the three whistleblowers in the case — Bryant Jongkees, Roberta Sellaro, and Laura Steenbergen— to reflect on their experiences. (We should note that they did not confirm it was Colzato named in the report.)

Retraction Watch (RW): What prompted you to come forward?

Bryant Jongkees, Roberta Sellaro, and Laura Steenbergen (BJ, RS, LS): We worked with the accused for many years, during which we observed and felt forced to get involved in several bad research practices. These practices would range from small to large violations. Since early on we were aware that this was not OK or normal, and so we tried to stand up to this person early on.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

0