{"id":257902,"date":"2018-06-07T18:13:40","date_gmt":"2018-06-07T21:13:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/?p=257902"},"modified":"2018-06-07T18:13:40","modified_gmt":"2018-06-07T21:13:40","slug":"mass-resignation-from-editorial-board","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/mass-resignation-from-editorial-board\/","title":{"rendered":"Mass resignation from editorial board"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Nineteen researchers, most of whom are based at Johns Hopkins University, USA, stepped down from the editorial board of <em>Scientific Reports<\/em>, published by the Springer Nature group, in November. The mass resignation was a protest against the journal&#8217;s decision not to retract an allegedly plagiarized article describing a method of identifying regulatory sequences in DNA. According to Johns Hopkins biomedical scientist Michael Beer, the paper essentially reproduces parts of an article he wrote that was published in <em>PLOS Computational Biology<\/em> in 2014, and presents equations identical to those he developed for a software algorithm. Instead of retracting the article, the journal chose to correct it, adding an acknowledgement of Beer&#8217;s work. One of the authors of the disputed paper, Liu Bin, from the Harbin Institute of Technology in Shenzhen, China, is also on the <em>Scientific Reports<\/em> editorial board.<\/p>\n<p>According to Richard White, editor of the journal, &#8220;the inaccuracies and ambiguities in the paper do not warrant its retraction.&#8221; Steven Salzberg, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who called on his colleagues to resign, says he was very disappointed with the journal&#8217;s decision. &#8220;When a student plagiarizes, we don\u2019t give him a chance to revise and resubmit. We give him a failing grade and sometimes take even stronger disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion. <em>Scientific Reports<\/em> is thus setting a very poor example.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Nineteen researchers stepped down from the editorial board of Scientific Reports, in November","protected":false},"author":475,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[155],"tags":[230,237,215],"coauthors":[785],"class_list":["post-257902","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-good-practices","tag-ethics","tag-genetics","tag-scientometrics"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257902","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/475"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=257902"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257902\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257902"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257902"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257902"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=257902"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}