Two of those cases concerned Journal of Scanning Probe Microscopy, 2009, 4, 1–11 which re-used images from both J Am Chem Soc, 2006, 128, 11135-11149 and J. Phys. Chem. C 2008,112, 6279-6284. I noted that:
Cases 3 and 4 together indicate that all of the experimental STM figures in paper 2 (i.e. Fig 2-5) contain data re-use (from two different articles).
The raw data released last week reveal that the data analysis section (i.e. Fig 6-8) of that same Journal of Scanning Probe Microscopy article is also based on previously published data… but from a third paper (Nature Materials, 2004,3, 330-336). The re-analysis of previously published data is of course a perfectly acceptable activity if the figure legends or text indicate clearly where the data analyzed come from which is unfortunately not the case here.
The method section of that article starts with “The synthesis procedures used for the particles described in this paper are derived from previous reports”. A more accurate version would have read: “The images presented or analyzed in this paper are extracted from previous papers” (note the ‘or’ since the images ‘presented’ were coming from different papers than those which were ‘analysed’).
This Journal of Scanning Probe Microscopy article is quoted several times in the Response to Stripy Nanoparticle Revisited to show that the authors have “performed a full regression analysis to statistically validate and support our conclusions“. This analysis will be the topic of another post.