PLoSONE 精巧な手は創造主なる神の賜物

プロスワン(PLOS ONE)は、学術雑誌の出版社PLOSが2006年に創刊したオープンアクセスジャーナルです。論文の価値は雑誌掲載後に研究者が決めるべきという編集方針と、紙面の制約がないオンラインジャーナルという特性から、投稿された論文の採択率が高いという特徴があります(採択率70%程度といわれる)。論文が受理されやすいわりにはインパクトファクターも比較的高めなので、多くの研究者に支持されています。日本人研究者にも馴染みの深いメジャーな学術誌の一つです。

ところが、2016年1月5日にこのプロスワンに掲載された中国人研究者の論文「Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living」(日常生活での把持動作における手の協調運動の生体力学的な特徴)が、研究者に衝撃を与えています。

Liu2016PLOSONE_fig1http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146193

なんと、この論文の中で著者らは、「手の精巧な構造は、創造主なる神のおかげである」と1度ならず3回も繰り返し述べているのです。

まずアブストラクトで(該当箇所を太字で示しました)、

“The explicit functional link indicates that the biomechanical characteristic of tendinous connective architecture between muscles and articulations is the proper design by the Creator to perform a multitude of daily tasks in a comfortable way.”(http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146193

と述べ、イントロダクションでも、

“Hand coordination should indicate the mystery of the Creator’s invention.” http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146193

と説明し、さらにディスカッションのセクションでも、

“In conclusion, our study can improve the understanding of the human hand and confirm that the mechanical architecture is the proper design by the Creator for dexterous performance of numerous functions following the evolutionary remodeling of the ancestral hand for millions of years.”(http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146193

と結論付けています。

この論文を掲載した雑誌社に対して、「プロスワンはもはやジョークだ!」という激しい反応も。

このコメントをツイートしたのは進化学者のJames McInerney氏で、後から、”My original tweet was strong because creationism is a nuisance to me for 20+ years.“と説明を加えましたが、様々な反応を引き起こしたようで、さらに、”I wish half the people that attacked me today would also tweet something to Plos about this.“と述べています。   創造論を主張する論文を学術誌が掲載することは、科学者からの信頼を著しく低下させる行為です。PLOS ONEの他のエディターや査読経験者らも、今回の論文掲載を強い口調で批判しています。

RE: RE: RE: Notification from PLOS StaffRicardSol replied to sathya1 on 02 Mar 2016 at 21:18 GMT I think that pretending to defend a creationist argument (non-science) in a science journal raises serious doubts about the whole enterprise. The paper should be retracted. As a PLOS ONE editor I believe accepting this situation would seriously damage our credibility.

RE: Notification from PLOS Staff thermalecology replied to PLoS_ONE_Group on 02 Mar 2016 at 20:29 GMT The article should be retracted and the handling editor should be dismissed. As an Editor for this journal, I am appalled.

A shameful act Posted by easouti on 03 Mar 2016 at 23:18 GMT Regretfully I have to withdraw my support for the journal as a reviewer. Also to bring this shameful incident to the attention of my academic colleagues and students who might consider submitting their work for publication at PLOS ONE.

この騒動を受けて、PLOS ONEの編集部は、2016年3月4日にこの論文を取り下げました。

Retraction Following publication, readers raised concerns about language in the article that makes references to a ‘Creator’, and about the overall rationale and findings of the study. Upon receiving these concerns, the PLOS ONE editors have carried out an evaluation of the manuscript and the pre-publication process, and they sought further advice on the work from experts in the editorial board. This evaluation confirmed concerns with the scientific rationale, presentation and language, which were not adequately addressed during peer review. Consequently, the PLOS ONE editors consider that the work cannot be relied upon and retract this publication. The editors apologize to readers for the inappropriate language in the article and the errors during the evaluation process. 4 Mar 2016: The PLOS ONE Staff (2016) Retraction: Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151685. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151685 View retraction

「the Creator (創造主なる神)」という言葉は要旨で既に使われており、PLOS ONEのエディターは要旨すら読まずに掲載を決めたのかと、論文の質を担保できていない査読プロセスが不安視される出来事でした。

今回の騒動に関して、論文の著者は創造論(クリエイショニズム)と結びつける意図は全くなく、ネイティブスピーカーにとってのthe Creatorの意味を理解していなかったための誤用であると釈明しました。

Response about the incorrected use of the wordPosted by Mingjin on 03 Mar 2016 at 12:10 GMT
We are sorry for drawing the debates about creationism. Our study has no relationship with creationism. English is not our native language. Our understanding of the word ?Creator? was not actually as a native English speaker expected. Now we realized that we had misunderstood the word ?Creator?. What we would like to express is that the biomechanical characteristic of tendious connective architecture between muscles and articulations is a proper ?design? by the ‘”nature”‘ (result of evolution) to perform a multitude of daily grasping tasks. We will change the ?Creator? to ?nature? in the revised manuscript. We apologize for any troubles may have caused by this misunderstanding.

英語の誤用だけが問題なら雑誌社の意向で論文を一方的に撤回するのはおかしいという意見もあります。

The question is that why PLOS ONE did not give the authors this chance to revise the language while the scientific content of the paper is sound? (Punishment or Retraction? Posted by Rafsanjani on 05 Mar 2016 at 06:11 GMT)

参考

    1. Paper that says human hand was ‘designed by Creator’ sparks concern (Daniel Cressey 03 March 2016 nature.com)
    2. Scientific journal cites a creator. Scientists say OMG (Chris Matyszczyk cnet.com March 4, 2016)
    3. A Science Journal Invokes ‘the Creator,’ and Science Pushes Back (Madison Kotack 03.03.16.Wired.com)
    4. Science Journal Publishes Creationist Paper, Science Community Flips Out (George Dvorsky GIZMODO)
    5. Scientific paper which says the human hand was designed by a ‘Creator’ sparks controversy (Doug Bolton independent.co.uk)
    6. How did this article, suggesting Intelligent Design of the hand, make it through peer-review and into PLOS One? (reddit.com)
    7. Intelligent Design and Design Creationism Make it to PLoS ONE (EvoLiteracy News 03 03 2016)
    8. 1:1はじめに神は天と地とを創造された。 1:26神はまた言われた、「われわれのかたちに、われわれにかたどって人を造り、これに海の魚と、空の鳥と、家畜と、地のすべての獣と、地のすべての這うものとを治めさせよう」。 1:27神は自分のかたちに人を創造された。すなわち、神のかたちに創造し、男と女とに創造された。(創世記 第1章
    9. PLOS ONE Jounral Impact Factor:4.351(2009), 4.411(2010), 4.092(2011), 3.73(2012), 3.534(2013), 3.234(2014/2015) (scijournal.org)
    10. PLOS ONEのこれまで,いま,この先 (佐藤 翔 情報管理 Vol. 57 (2014) No. 9 P 607-617)
    11. オープンアクセス・メガジャーナルの挑戦:伝統的学術誌を超えられるか(フォルテ 2013/08/29):”PLOS ONEはその無差別的なシステムゆえに肥大化しており、粗悪な論文のゴミ捨て場だとして拒絶する研究者も少なくありません。しかし、PLOS ONE掲載論文の中には頻繁に引用される論文も相当数あり、このことがPLOS ONEの決して低くはないインパクトファクターの獲得に大きく寄与していると考えられます。”
    12. Part 1 – Editing and Publishing in PLoS One Journal (youtu.be/UQ1kD70L2bo) Talk given by J. David Creswell, a professor in the Psychology department, on editing and publishing in PLoS One journals. Part 1 of the “Open Scholarship for Graduate Students and Early Career Researchers”, event on International Open Access Week held at Carnegie Mellon University on October 22, 2013.
    13. A Senior PLOS Editor Speaks! Advice on Getting Published in PLOS One and Observations about Trends in Publishing (youtu.be/Cb8gVst1dbI) Speaker: Elizabeth Silva, M.Sc. Ph.D., Associate Editor, PLOS One  8/28/13
    14. PLoS ONEとOAメガジャーナルの興隆(第5 回 SPARC Japan セミナー2011「OAメガジャーナルの興隆」 ピーター・ビンフィールド(パブリック・ライブラリー・オブ・サイエンス))
    15. Harold Varmus (NCI/PLoS): Changing the Way We Publish (youtu.be/7Xh3ZFxJpZU) In 2003, Dr. Varmus co-founded the Public Library of Science (PLoS), an open access forum for publishing scientific papers in biology or medicine.