Do retraction practices work effectively? Evidence from citations of psychological retracted articles

Author:

Yang Siluo1,Qi Fan2ORCID,Diao Heyu2,Ajiferuke Isola3

Affiliation:

1. School of Information Management, Wuhan University, China; Research Center for Chinese Science Evaluation (RCCSE), China

2. School of Information Management, Wuhan University, China

3. Faculty of Information & Media Studies, Western University, Canada

Abstract

Scientific retraction practices are intended to help purge the continued use of flawed research and assist in maintaining the integrity, credibility and quality of scientific literature. However, the practical effect of retraction is still vague and needs to be further explored. In this study, we analysed the citation counts and sentiments (positive/negative) of retracted articles in psychology journals from Web of Science to explore the effect of retraction. Causal inference strategies were used to measure the net effect of retractions on citation. Results show that the retraction practices induced the citation counts to reduce as expected. However, the proportion of negative citations also decreased because of retraction, indicating an unsatisfied effect. The retraction practice of high-impact factors and open access journals was more effective than other journals. The study integrated an understanding of the dissemination of erroneous publications and provided implications for liabilities involved in the whole retraction process.

Funder

national social science fund of china

ministry of education of the people’s republic of china

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems

Reference55 articles.

1. COPE Council. COPE guidelines: retraction guidelines, 2009, https://publicationethics.org/files/cope-retraction-guidelines-v2.pdf

2. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications

3. The incidence and role of negative citations in science

4. Post retraction citations in context: a case study

5. Empirical developments in retraction

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3