1887

What Studies of Retractions Tell Us

    Authors: Adam Marcus1, Ivan Oransky1,2,*
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Retraction Watch, New York, NY 10036; 2: New York University, New York, NY 10036
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Published 15 December 2014
    • *Corresponding author. E-mail: ivan-oransky@erols.com.
    • ©2014 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. December 2014 vol. 15 no. 2 151-154. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.855
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    180.60 Kb
  • HTML
    48.08 Kb
  • XML

    Abstract:

    The retraction is receiving a growing amount of attention as an important event in scientific and scholarly publishing. Not only are some journals becoming increasingly open in their handling of the articles they withdraw—allowing researchers to gain important insights into the work of their colleagues—but scholars, too, have greater access to the reasons for retractions, information that is dramatically reshaping our understanding of such events. As this article will demonstrate, recent research has inverted the accepted lore about why retractions happen and their impact.

Key Concept Ranking

Cancer Treatment
0.4353615
0.4353615

References & Citations

1. Abu-Omar AA 2011 Prevention of postpartum hemorrhage, safety and efficacy Saudi Med J 22 1118 1121
2. Amos KA 2014 The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations J Med Lib Assoc 102 87 91 10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.005 http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.005
3. Azoulay P, Furman JL, Krieger JL, Murray FE 2014 Retractions Rev Econ Stat 96 doi: 10.1162/ REST_a_00469
4. Bilbrey E, O’Dell N, Creamer J 2014 A novel rubric for rating the quality of retraction notices Publications 2 14 26 10.3390/publications2010014 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/publications2010014
5. Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR, Scoville C 1999 Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine Bull Med Libr Assoc 87 437 443 10550028 226618
6. Burnett S, Singiser RH, Clower C 2014 Teaching about ethics and the process of science using retracted publications J Coll Sci Teach 43 24
7. Casadevall A, Steen RG, Fang FC 2014 Sources of error in the retracted scientific literature FASEB J 28 14 256735 10.1096/fj.14-256735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1096/fj.14-256735
8. Cheng BQ, et al 2008 Chemoembolization combined with radiofrequency ablation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 3 cm: a randomized trial JAMA 299 1669 1677 10.1001/jama.299.14.1669 18398079 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.14.1669
9. Davis PM 2012 The persistence of error: a study of retracted articles on the Internet and in personal libraries J Med Lib Assoc 100 184 189 10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.008 http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.008
10. Decullier E, Huot L, Samson G, Maisonneuve H 2013 Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study BMC Res Notes 6 238 10.1186/1756-0500-6-238 23782596 3691605 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-6-238
11. Decullier E, Huot L, Maisonneuve H 2014 What time-lag for a retraction search on PubMed? BMC Res Notes 7 395 10.1186/1756-0500-7-395 24965905 4105554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-395
12. Elia N, Wager E, Tramèr MR 2014 Fate of articles that warranted retraction due to ethical concerns: a descriptive cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE 9 e85846 10.1371/journal.pone.0085846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085846
13. Fanelli D Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. 2013 PLoS Med. 10 e1001563 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001563 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001563
14. Fang FC, Casadevall A 2011 Retracted science and the retraction index Infect Immun 79 3855 3859 10.1128/IAI.05661-11 21825063 3187237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/IAI.05661-11
15. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A 2012 Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109 17028 17033 10.1073/pnas.1212247109 23027971 3479492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109
16. Furman JL, Jensen K, Murray F 2012 Governing knowledge in the scientific community: exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine Res Policy 41 276 290 10.1016/j.respol.2011.11.001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.11.001
17. Grieneisen ML, Zhang M 2012 A comprehensive survey of retracted articles from the scholarly literature PLoS ONE 7 e44118 10.1371/journal.pone.0044118 23115617 3480361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044118
18. Jin GZ, Jones B, Lu SF, Uzzi B 2013 The reverse Matthew effect: catastrophe and consequence in scientific teams NBER Working Paper No. 19489
19. Karabag SF, Berggren C 2012 Retraction, dishonesty and plagiarism: analysis of a crucial issue for academic publishing, and the inadequate responses from leading journals in economics and management disciplines J Appl Econom Bus Res 2 172 183
20. Lu SF, Jin GZ, Uzzi B, Jones B 2013 The retraction penalty: evidence from the web of science Sci Reports 3 3146
21. Marcus A, Oransky I 2013 The euphemism parade Lab Times 7 52
22. Nath SB, Marcus SC, Druss BG 2006 Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes? Med J Aust 185 152 154 16893357
23. Necker S Scientific misbehavior in economics. 2014 Res. Policy. [Online.] 10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.002
24. Resnik DB, Dinse GE 2013 Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings J Med Ethics 39 46 50 10.1136/medethics-2012-100766 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100766
25. Samp JC, Schumock GT, Pickard AS 2012 Retracted publications in the drug literature Pharmacotherapy 32 586 95 10.1002/j.1875-9114.2012.01100.x 22581659 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1875-9114.2012.01100.x
26. Steen RG 2011 Retractions in the medical literature: how many patients are put at risk by flawed research? J Med Ethics 37 688 692 10.1136/jme.2011.043133 21586404 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2011.043133
27. Steen RG Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing? 2011 J Med Ethics 37 249 253 10.1136/jme.2010.040923 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.040923
28. Steen RG, Casadevall A, Fang FC 2013 Why has the number of scientific retractions increased? PLoS ONE 8 e68397 10.1371/journal.pone.0068397 23861902 3704583 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068397
29. Stern AM, Casadevall A, Steen RG, Fang FC 2014 Research: financial costs and personal consequences of research misconduct resulting in retracted publications. eLife 3 e02956 10.7554/eLife.02956 http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02956
30. Van Noorden R 2011 Science publishing: the trouble with retractions Nature 478 26 28 10.1038/478026a 21979026 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/478026a
31. Wager E, Williams P 2011 Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008 J. Med. Ethics 37 567 570 10.1136/jme.2010.040964 21486985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.040964
32. Williams P, Wager E 2013 Exploring why and how journal editors retract articles: findings from a qualitative study Sci Eng Ethics 19 1 11 10.1007/s11948-011-9292-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9292-0
33. Woolley KL, et al 2011 Lack of involvement of medical writers and the pharmaceutical industry in publications retracted for misconduct: a systematic, controlled, retrospective study Curr Med Res Opin 27 1175 1182 10.1185/03007995.2011.573546 21473670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2011.573546
jmbe.v15i2.855.citations
jmbe/15/2
content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.855
Loading

Citations loading...

Supplemental Material

No supplementary material available for this content.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.855
2014-12-15
2017-11-18

Abstract:

The retraction is receiving a growing amount of attention as an important event in scientific and scholarly publishing. Not only are some journals becoming increasingly open in their handling of the articles they withdraw—allowing researchers to gain important insights into the work of their colleagues—but scholars, too, have greater access to the reasons for retractions, information that is dramatically reshaping our understanding of such events. As this article will demonstrate, recent research has inverted the accepted lore about why retractions happen and their impact.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/15/2/jmbe-15-151.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.855&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error