Frances Arnold’s retraction and the case for slow science

Retracting a paper, especially if you are a high-profile researcher, is never going to be painless. But the biggest fear may be that it will blemish your reputation, invite accusations of hubris, and create wariness about other claims you have made or will make.

Yet the response to a retraction by Caltech chemical engineer Frances Arnold, whose profile as 2018 chemistry Nobel laureate could hardly be higher, has been very different: it has been universally, and rightly, praised as a model of integrity and responsibility. In a tweet following up on the announcement of the retraction of her group’s paper in Science in May of last year on the enzymatic synthesis of beta-lactams, she said: ‘I apologize to all. I was a bit busy when this was submitted, and did not do my job well.’

What’s so admirable in this statement is precisely what is too often lacking now in public apologies – in science, yes, but even more so in public life generally. The apology is simple and direct, and explains without making excuses. It would be nice, though forlorn, to think that politicians might take a lesson here: saying sorry well enhances rather than diminishes your reputation and credibility.