The recent retraction by Nobel laureate Linda Buck and colleagues of a 2001 Nature paper sparked discussions on NPG blogs. On Action Potential, the Nature Neuroscience blog (http://tinyurl.com/23bnwg), Debra Speert calls it “the highest profile retraction that I can recall in neuroscience”, and on the Nature Network neuroscience forum (http://tinyurl.com/34gxn9) readers are asked for their views on the role of journals and scientists in retracting published work.
The Nature journals correction policy is at http://tinyurl.com/3cluba. For a retraction or other type of correction to be published, all authors typically need to sign it. If some of the authors do not agree, the editors seek advice from peer reviewers and, if necessary, the institution and/or funder. In the event that the retraction or correction is published, the name(s) of the dissenting author(s) are noted in the text of the correction. More information about Buck's retraction is in a News story (Nature 452, 13; 2008), and includes a clarification from one of the paper's authors in the online comment thread.
About this article
Cite this article
From the blogosphere. Nature 452, xii (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/7185xiic