Cargando…
What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions?
Academic journal publications may be retracted following institutional investigations that confirm allegations of research misconduct. Retraction notices can provide insight into the role institutional investigations play in the decision to retract a publication. Through a content analysis of 7,318...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10319669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37402081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4 |
_version_ | 1785068288416415744 |
---|---|
author | Xu, Shaoxiong Brian Evans, Natalie Hu, Guangwei Bouter, Lex |
author_facet | Xu, Shaoxiong Brian Evans, Natalie Hu, Guangwei Bouter, Lex |
author_sort | Xu, Shaoxiong Brian |
collection | PubMed |
description | Academic journal publications may be retracted following institutional investigations that confirm allegations of research misconduct. Retraction notices can provide insight into the role institutional investigations play in the decision to retract a publication. Through a content analysis of 7,318 retraction notices published between 1927 and 2019 and indexed by the Web of Science, we found that most retraction notices (73.7%) provided no information about institutional investigations that may have led to retractions. A minority of the retraction notices (26.3%) mentioned an institutional investigation either by journal authorities (12.1%), research performing organizations (10.3%), joint institutions (1.9%), research integrity and ethics governing bodies (1.0%), third-party institutions (0.5%), unspecified institutions (0.4%), or research funding organizations (0.1%). Comparing retraction notices issued before and after the introduction of retraction guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in 2009 revealed that those published after the guidelines’ publication were more likely to report investigations by journal authorities. Comparing retraction notices from different disciplines revealed that those from social sciences and the humanities were more likely to disclose investigations by research performing organizations than those from biomedical and natural sciences. Based on these findings, we suggest that the COPE retraction guidelines in the future make it mandatory to disclose in retraction notices institutional investigations leading to retractions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10319669 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103196692023-07-06 What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? Xu, Shaoxiong Brian Evans, Natalie Hu, Guangwei Bouter, Lex Sci Eng Ethics Original Research/Scholarship Academic journal publications may be retracted following institutional investigations that confirm allegations of research misconduct. Retraction notices can provide insight into the role institutional investigations play in the decision to retract a publication. Through a content analysis of 7,318 retraction notices published between 1927 and 2019 and indexed by the Web of Science, we found that most retraction notices (73.7%) provided no information about institutional investigations that may have led to retractions. A minority of the retraction notices (26.3%) mentioned an institutional investigation either by journal authorities (12.1%), research performing organizations (10.3%), joint institutions (1.9%), research integrity and ethics governing bodies (1.0%), third-party institutions (0.5%), unspecified institutions (0.4%), or research funding organizations (0.1%). Comparing retraction notices issued before and after the introduction of retraction guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in 2009 revealed that those published after the guidelines’ publication were more likely to report investigations by journal authorities. Comparing retraction notices from different disciplines revealed that those from social sciences and the humanities were more likely to disclose investigations by research performing organizations than those from biomedical and natural sciences. Based on these findings, we suggest that the COPE retraction guidelines in the future make it mandatory to disclose in retraction notices institutional investigations leading to retractions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4. Springer Netherlands 2023-07-04 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10319669/ /pubmed/37402081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research/Scholarship Xu, Shaoxiong Brian Evans, Natalie Hu, Guangwei Bouter, Lex What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title | What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title_full | What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title_fullStr | What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title_full_unstemmed | What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title_short | What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions? |
title_sort | what do retraction notices reveal about institutional investigations into allegations underlying retractions? |
topic | Original Research/Scholarship |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10319669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37402081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT xushaoxiongbrian whatdoretractionnoticesrevealaboutinstitutionalinvestigationsintoallegationsunderlyingretractions AT evansnatalie whatdoretractionnoticesrevealaboutinstitutionalinvestigationsintoallegationsunderlyingretractions AT huguangwei whatdoretractionnoticesrevealaboutinstitutionalinvestigationsintoallegationsunderlyingretractions AT bouterlex whatdoretractionnoticesrevealaboutinstitutionalinvestigationsintoallegationsunderlyingretractions |