Psychology professor earns retractions after publishing with ‘repeat offenders’

Kelly-Ann Allen

A psychologist in Australia has earned a pair of retractions after publishing several papers with international coauthors suspected of authorship fraud, Retraction Watch has learned. 

Kelly-Ann Allen, an associate professor at Monash University, in Clayton, and editor-in-chief of two psychology journals, declined to comment for this article.

The retraction notices, both in Frontiers journals, cite an investigation by the publisher confirming “a serious breach of our authorship policies and of publication ethics.”

Frontiers pulled “Intolerance of uncertainty scale-12: psychometric properties of this construct among Iranian undergraduate students” on November 27 and “Psychometric assessment of the Persian translation of the interpersonal mindfulness scale with undergraduate students” on September 4. The latter was one of more than three dozen papers the publisher has linked to “the unethical practice of buying or selling authorship,” as we reported at the time. 

The articles have been cited 21 times.

Nick Wise, a scientific sleuth, told Retraction Watch he had reported the former paper to Frontiers in October 2022 “due to suspicions about authorship.” 

“The cause of my suspicion was the diversity of nations and disciplines amongst the authors, and the presence of repeat offenders for buying authorship in Wanich Suksatan, Indrajit Patra and Supat Chupradit,” Wise said.

All three individuals have had papers pulled in the past over concerns about authorship, according to the Retraction Watch database. Those retractions happened after the two papers published by Frontiers were submitted.

Suksatan and Chupradit have been suspected of buying authorship of research papers to boost their resumés, as have others of Allen’s coauthors

Wise even found a Facebook post advertising authorship for sale for a paper that looked very similar to the article that was pulled on September 4. The ad was posted by Salim Kallel, about whom we have written before and whose Facebook profile includes frequent “calls for coauthorship.”

“Wonderful opportunity to publish a paper in Scopus or Web of Science in collaboration with the authors from all over the world,” Kallel promised in one post on December 5.

Abbas Abdollahi of Alzahra University in Tehran, Iran, who is a corresponding author on the two retracted papers, did not respond to an email asking for comment. 

Allen has published multiple papers with Abdollahi. Starting in 2022, however, academics from several other countries – including Thailand, Indonesia, Russia, Uzbekistan and Saudi Arabia – started appearing as coauthors on Abdollahi and Allen’s papers, Wise said. 

He listed four such publications, in addition to those now retracted:

“I contacted Kelly-Ann Allen in January 2023 because I was surprised to see her name on a paper with Wanich Suksatan, Supat Chupradit and Indrajit Patra, given their history of being authors of works where authorship has been advertised for sale on Facebook,” Wise said. “She said that she’d done a lot of work for the paper and trusted Abbas Abdollahi whom she had worked with before.”

Anastasia Long, head of communications at Frontiers, told us in an email:

The retraction decision was a result of a thorough investigation by the Frontiers’ Research Integrity team. The concerns over ‘authorship for sale’ were flagged post-publication both directly to us by concerned readers, as well as via Pubpeer, a valuable source of community feedback, of the adverts for several of the publications in question. Subsequently, our Research Integrity and Auditing teams investigated dozens more papers spanning 24 journals, and looked at patterns in behavior, editorial assignment, peer review and citations. 

For the two articles you mention, several authors were added post-acceptance with claims of their significant contribution to the research. The presence of adverts selling authorship, the lack of expertise of some authors with regards to the subject matter of the articles, and broad geographical diversity of the contributors – with lack of prior collaboration, were key points of the investigation. One author also contacted us to claim that their name had been added to the article without their consent. Taken together, the evidence confirmed a breach of our authorship policies and of publication ethics, resulting in retractions. 

Frontiers’ priority is to protect the scientific record, while upholding the highest ethical standards and rigor, and we are confident in our decision. Moreover, to help prevent cases of “authorship-for-sale” among its research publications, Frontiers published a new author policy and you can learn more about it in our blog post.

As we reported earlier, the new policy states the publisher will deny authorship changes requested after acceptance as a rule.

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, subscribe to our free daily digest or paid weekly update, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, or add us to your RSS reader. If you find a retraction that’s not in The Retraction Watch Database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at team@retractionwatch.com.

Highly cited cancer immunologist “seriously breached” research conduct code: Australia institute

A cancer immunologist who as of 2017 was “the most highly cited immunologist in Australia” has “seriously breached Codes relating to responsible research conduct,” according to his former employer. QIMR Berghofer in Brisbane “has commissioned an independent external investigation after a number of complaints relating to the research conduct of a former employee Professor Mark … Continue reading Highly cited cancer immunologist “seriously breached” research conduct code: Australia institute

University clears scientist of logging industry’s misconduct allegations

The University of Tasmania has cleared one of its scientists of wrongdoing after she was accused by the Australian logging industry of publishing flawed research linking logging to increased forest flammability and of having a conflict of interest with an environmental group. The university then implemented mandatory research integrity training for its school of geography, … Continue reading University clears scientist of logging industry’s misconduct allegations

“The most horrific time of my career.” What do you do when you realize years of your published work is built on an error?

In September 2019 Nicola Smith, a molecular pharmacologist in Australia, faced a brutal decision. She’d realized that she’d made a mistake — or rather, failed to catch a mistake in her group’s research before the crippling error was published — in two academic articles which were the culmination of years of work. And she could … Continue reading “The most horrific time of my career.” What do you do when you realize years of your published work is built on an error?

Researcher leaves post at Australian university years after papers come under scrutiny

Three years after work from his lab was the subject of “serious allegations,” a professor at Deakin University in Australia has left his post, Retraction Watch has learned. In an October 6, 2020 letter to staff at Deakin’s School of Medicine obtained by Retraction Watch, Dean Gary Rogers writes that Jagat Kanwar, who joined the … Continue reading Researcher leaves post at Australian university years after papers come under scrutiny

Better (publishing) background checks: A way toward greater integrity in science

Science represents perhaps the single greatest accomplishment of humankind. Of all human institutions, organisations and establishments, science has proven an effective tool for driving progress. It is inherently self-correcting, and tolerates — and even demands — skepticism, challenge and self-critique. Few human institutions can make a similar claim. However, there is increasing recognition and concern that … Continue reading Better (publishing) background checks: A way toward greater integrity in science

An Australian university cleared a cancer researcher of misconduct. He’s now retracted six papers.

The story of Levon Khachigian’s research is a long and winding tale. One place to start would be in October 2009, when a paper co-authored by Khachigian — whose work at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) has been funded by millions of dollars in funding from the Australian government, and has led to … Continue reading An Australian university cleared a cancer researcher of misconduct. He’s now retracted six papers.

Journal retracts paper by controversial Australian journalist

The Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) has retracted a 2003 paper that resulted from the PhD thesis of Maryanne Demasi, an Australian journalist whose reporting on statins and the risks of cancer from cell phones has been a lightning rod. The move, for what the journal says was attempts to reuse images to represent different … Continue reading Journal retracts paper by controversial Australian journalist

Misconduct probe of once rising star prompts retraction of cat’s meow paper

A group of Australian researchers who studied the cat’s meow as a model for urinary incontinence and other motor-neural issues in people have lost a 2015 paper in the wake of a misconduct investigation. The target of the inquiry was Hari Subramanian, a former senior research fellow at the Queensland Brain Institute, part of the … Continue reading Misconduct probe of once rising star prompts retraction of cat’s meow paper

Controversial Australian science journalist admits to duplication in her PhD thesis

A prominent (yet controversial) journalist in Australia has admitted to duplicating three images that were part of her PhD thesis — a practice outside experts agreed was acceptable, if not ideal, at the time, according to a report released today. As part of an inquiry, the University of Adelaide convened an expert panel to investigate … Continue reading Controversial Australian science journalist admits to duplication in her PhD thesis