↓ Skip to main content

Research Integrity: the Experience of a Doubting Thomas

Overview of attention for article published in Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Research Integrity: the Experience of a Doubting Thomas
Published in
Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis, February 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00005-014-0272-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas P. Hettinger

Abstract

The sensational "reactome array" paper published in Science in 2009 was investigated in Spain by the Ethics Committee of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC) after Science issued an editorial expression of concern. The paper was retracted in 2010 because of "skepticism" due to "errors" in chemistry. The "errors" were so profound that many readers expressed doubt that they were really errors, but part of an elaborate hoax. I conducted a forensic analysis of mass spectrometry data in the paper's Supporting Online Material (SOM) and was able to prove that thousands of data values were in fact fabricated. The SOM contains signatures of improper extensive spreadsheet manipulations of incorrect atomic and molecular mass values as well as impossibly repetitive deviations of found molecular mass values from their expected values. No evidence of real mass spectrometry data was detected. Both CSIC and Science have been content to retract the paper without acknowledging the fabrications or assigning responsibility for them. Neither CSIC nor Science has expressed interest in having an independent investigation determining how the paper came to be written, reviewed and published. Their weak response to this episode is a daunting signal that there is an impending crisis in research integrity and science journalism.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 28%
Researcher 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 17%
Philosophy 2 11%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 5 28%
Unknown 2 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,755,290
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis
#109
of 394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,693
of 314,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 394 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,028 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.