TY - JOUR
T1 - What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions?
AU - Xu, Shaoxiong Brian
AU - Evans, Natalie
AU - Hu, Guangwei
AU - Bouter, Lex
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers of this article for their constructive comments and valuable suggestions.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/8
Y1 - 2023/8
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Allegation
KW - Institutional investigation
KW - Research integrity and ethics
KW - Research misconduct
KW - Retraction notice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85163951385&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4
DO - 10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 37402081
AN - SCOPUS:85163951385
SN - 1353-3452
VL - 29
JO - Science and Engineering Ethics
JF - Science and Engineering Ethics
IS - 4
M1 - 25
ER -