Cargando…

Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers

Retracted papers often circulate widely on social media, digital news, and other websites before their official retraction. The spread of potentially inaccurate or misleading results from retracted papers can harm the scientific community and the public. Here, we quantify the amount and type of atte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peng, Hao, Romero, Daniel M., Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: National Academy of Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9231484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119086119
_version_ 1784735350293266432
author Peng, Hao
Romero, Daniel M.
Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes
author_facet Peng, Hao
Romero, Daniel M.
Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes
author_sort Peng, Hao
collection PubMed
description Retracted papers often circulate widely on social media, digital news, and other websites before their official retraction. The spread of potentially inaccurate or misleading results from retracted papers can harm the scientific community and the public. Here, we quantify the amount and type of attention 3,851 retracted papers received over time in different online platforms. Comparing with a set of nonretracted control papers from the same journals with similar publication year, number of coauthors, and author impact, we show that retracted papers receive more attention after publication not only on social media but also, on heavily curated platforms, such as news outlets and knowledge repositories, amplifying the negative impact on the public. At the same time, we find that posts on Twitter tend to express more criticism about retracted than about control papers, suggesting that criticism-expressing tweets could contain factual information about problematic papers. Most importantly, around the time they are retracted, papers generate discussions that are primarily about the retraction incident rather than about research findings, showing that by this point, papers have exhausted attention to their results and highlighting the limited effect of retractions. Our findings reveal the extent to which retracted papers are discussed on different online platforms and identify at scale audience criticism toward them. In this context, we show that retraction is not an effective tool to reduce online attention to problematic papers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9231484
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher National Academy of Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92314842022-06-25 Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers Peng, Hao Romero, Daniel M. Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Social Sciences Retracted papers often circulate widely on social media, digital news, and other websites before their official retraction. The spread of potentially inaccurate or misleading results from retracted papers can harm the scientific community and the public. Here, we quantify the amount and type of attention 3,851 retracted papers received over time in different online platforms. Comparing with a set of nonretracted control papers from the same journals with similar publication year, number of coauthors, and author impact, we show that retracted papers receive more attention after publication not only on social media but also, on heavily curated platforms, such as news outlets and knowledge repositories, amplifying the negative impact on the public. At the same time, we find that posts on Twitter tend to express more criticism about retracted than about control papers, suggesting that criticism-expressing tweets could contain factual information about problematic papers. Most importantly, around the time they are retracted, papers generate discussions that are primarily about the retraction incident rather than about research findings, showing that by this point, papers have exhausted attention to their results and highlighting the limited effect of retractions. Our findings reveal the extent to which retracted papers are discussed on different online platforms and identify at scale audience criticism toward them. In this context, we show that retraction is not an effective tool to reduce online attention to problematic papers. National Academy of Sciences 2022-06-14 2022-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9231484/ /pubmed/35700358 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119086119 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Social Sciences
Peng, Hao
Romero, Daniel M.
Horvát, Emőke-Ágnes
Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title_full Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title_fullStr Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title_full_unstemmed Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title_short Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
title_sort dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers
topic Social Sciences
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9231484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700358
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119086119
work_keys_str_mv AT penghao dynamicsofcrossplatformattentiontoretractedpapers
AT romerodanielm dynamicsofcrossplatformattentiontoretractedpapers
AT horvatemokeagnes dynamicsofcrossplatformattentiontoretractedpapers