Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: The Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience

View ORCID ProfileElisabeth M. Bik, View ORCID ProfileFerric C. Fang, Amy L. Kullas, Roger J. Davis, View ORCID ProfileArturo Casadevall
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/354621
Elisabeth M. Bik
1uBiome Inc., San Francisco, CA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Elisabeth M. Bik
Ferric C. Fang
2Former Editor-in-Chief, Infection and Immunity. Departments of Laboratory Medicine and Microbiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ferric C. Fang
Amy L. Kullas
3Amy L. Kullas, Publishing Ethics Manager, Journals, American Society for Microbiology (ASM), Washington, DC, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roger J. Davis
4Former Editor-in-Chief, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Program in Molecular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arturo Casadevall
5Editor-in-Chief, mBio. Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Arturo Casadevall
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

The present study analyzed 960 papers published in Molecular and Cellular Biology (MCB) from 2009-2016 and found 59 (6.1%) to contain inappropriately duplicated images. The 59 instances of inappropriate image duplication led to 42 corrections, 5 retractions and 12 instances in which no action was taken. Our experience suggests that the majority of inappropriate image duplications result from errors during figure preparation that can be remedied by correction. Nevertheless, ~10% of papers with inappropriate image duplications in MCB were retracted. If this proportion is representative, then as many as 35,000 papers in the literature are candidates for retraction due to image duplication. The resolution of inappropriate image duplication concerns after publication required an average of 6 h of journal staff time per published paper. MCB instituted a pilot program to screen images of accepted papers prior to publication that identified 12 manuscripts (14.5% out of 83) with image concerns in two months. The screening and correction of papers before publication required an average of 30 min of staff time per problematic paper. Image screening can identify papers with problematic images prior to publication, reduces post-publication problems and requires significantly less staff time than the correction of problems after publication.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted June 24, 2018.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: The Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: The Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience
Elisabeth M. Bik, Ferric C. Fang, Amy L. Kullas, Roger J. Davis, Arturo Casadevall
bioRxiv 354621; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/354621
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Analysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: The Molecular and Cellular Biology Experience
Elisabeth M. Bik, Ferric C. Fang, Amy L. Kullas, Roger J. Davis, Arturo Casadevall
bioRxiv 354621; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/354621

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (3573)
  • Biochemistry (7517)
  • Bioengineering (5478)
  • Bioinformatics (20671)
  • Biophysics (10254)
  • Cancer Biology (7927)
  • Cell Biology (11566)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (6563)
  • Ecology (10130)
  • Epidemiology (2065)
  • Evolutionary Biology (13532)
  • Genetics (9496)
  • Genomics (12788)
  • Immunology (7869)
  • Microbiology (19443)
  • Molecular Biology (7611)
  • Neuroscience (41862)
  • Paleontology (306)
  • Pathology (1252)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2179)
  • Physiology (3249)
  • Plant Biology (7005)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1291)
  • Synthetic Biology (1941)
  • Systems Biology (5405)
  • Zoology (1107)