From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 17:25:46 -0400

With thanks to Gary Price of InfoDOCKET for this posting.

-----Original Message-----

From Nature:

http://www.nature.com/news/problematic-images-found-in-4-of-biomedical-papers-1.19802

"Around 1 out of every 25 biomedical papers contains inappropriately
duplicated images, a huge analysis of 20,621 research articles suggests1.
The finding has prompted renewed calls for research journals to routinely
check images in accepted papers before they publish them.

Previous studies have analysed image duplication rates, but the latest
analysis is unusually large and has the advantage of spanning multiple
journals, says Bernd Pulverer, who is chief editor ofThe EMBO Journal in
Heidelberg, Germany. He notes that although most duplications do not point
to fraud or malevolence, they do misrepresent experiments."

Bik, who is at Stanford University in California, spent two years looking at
articles published from 1995 to 2014 in 40 different journals, hunting for
instances in which identical images were used to represent different
experiments within the same paper. She cross-checked the duplications that
she found with her two co-authors, both microbiologists.

Read the Complete Nature Article
Includes Link to Preprint Discussed in Nature Article

http://www.nature.com/news/problematic-images-found-in-4-of-biomedical-papers-1.19802

__gary

Gary D. Price, MLIS
Co-Founder and Editor, Library Journal's infoDOCKET Research Director,
Global Investigative Journalism Network Information Industry Analyst
Librarian

http://infoDOCKET.com
http://gijn.org
@infodocket
@gijn