Retracted and still cited
profile of post-retraction citations in articles by Brazilian researchers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245.29.125494Keywords:
retracted article, citation analysis, post-retraction citation, research integrity, research misconductAbstract
It characterizes the most cited retracted articles authored by Brazilian researchers, typifies post-retraction citations, and identifies patterns and outliers associated with the cited and citing documents analyzed. It uses the bibliometric method and the technique of citation analysis, configuring itself as exploratory research. From the results obtained from the analysis of 512 citations distributed in 407 citing documents, it was identified that 75.8% consisted of neutral citations 23.0% of positive citations and 1.2% of negative mentions. The prevalence of neutral citations shows that these articles continue to be cited as documents present in the literature without judging their scientific validity.
Downloads
References
BAR-ILAN, J.; HALEVI, G. Post retraction citations in context: a case study. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 113, n. 1, p. 547-565, 2017.
BAR-ILAN, J.; HALEVI, G. Temporal characteristics of retracted articles. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 116, n. 3, p. 1771-1783, 2018.
BAETHGE, C. Error in calculating main outcome in Gamma Ventral Capsulotomy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry, Chicago, v. 72, n. 12, p. 1257-1258, dec. 2015.
BERENBAUM, M. R. On zombies, struldbrugs, and other horrors of the scientific literature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Washington, v. 118, n. 32, p. 1-3, 2021.
BERTIN, M. et al. The invariant distribution of references in scientific articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, New York, v. 67, n. 1, p. 164-177, 2016.
BILBREY, E.; O'DELL, N.; CREAMER, J. A novel rubric for rating the quality of retraction notices". Publications, Basel, v. 2, n. 1, p. 14-26, 2014.
BOLBOACĂ, S. D. et al. Post retraction citations among manuscripts reporting a radiology-imaging diagnostic method. PLOS ONE, San Francisco, v. 14, n. 6, p. 1-14, 2019.
BORDIGNON, F. Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 124, n. 2, p. 1225-1239, 2020.
BOYACK, K. W. et al. Characterizing in-text citations in scientific articles: a large-scale analysis. Journal of Informetrics, Amsterdam, v. 12, n. 1, p. 59-73, 2018.
BUDD, J.; SIEVERT, M.; SCHULTZ, T. R. Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. Journal of the American Medical Association, Chicago, v. 280, n. 3, p. 296-297, 1998.
CANDAL-PEDREIRA, C. et al. Does retraction after misconduct have an impact on citations? A pre-post study. BMJ Global Health, London, v. 5, n. 11, p. 1-7, 2020.
CHEN, W. et al. Retracted publications in the biomedical literature with authors from mainland China. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 114, n. 1, p. 217-227, 2018.
ELANGO, B.; KOZAK, M.; RAJENDRAN, P. Analysis of retractions in Indian science. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 119, n. 2, p. 1081-1094, 2019.
ELSEVIER. Article withdrawal. Elsevier, Amsterdam, c2020. Disponível em: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal. Acesso em: 30 set. 2020.
FANG, F. C.; STEEN, R. G.; CASADEVALL, A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Washington, v. 109, n. 42, p. 17028-17033, 2012.
FANELLI, D. Why growing retractions are (mostly) a good sign. PLOS MEDICINE, San Francisco, v. 10, n. 12, p. 1-6, 2013.
GARFIELD, E. What do we know about fraud and other forms of intellectual dishonesty in science? Part 2. Why does fraud happen and what are its effects? Current Contents, Woodbury, v. 10, n. 15, p. 93-100, 1987.
GOOGLE ACADÊMICO. Página inicial. Mountain View, 2020. Disponível em: https://scholar.google.com.br/?hl=pt. Acesso em: 22 nov. 2022.
LUWEL, M. et al. The Schön case: Analyzing in-text citations to papers before and after retraction. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS, 23., 2018, Leiden. Proceedings […]. Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, 2018. p. 1025-1030.
MORAVCSIK, M. J.; MURUGESAN, P. Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science, City Road, v. 5, n. 1, p. 86-92, 1975.
MOHAN, M. et al. Rising from plagiarising. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Philadelphia, v. 14, n. 3, p. 538-540, 2015.
OSTP. Federal policy on research misconduct. Federal Register, Washington, DC, v. 65, n. 235, p. 76260-76264, 2000.
POWELL, L. Understanding plagiarism: developing a model of plagiarising behavior. In: INTERNATIONAL PLAGIARISM CONFERENCE, 5., 2012. Newcastle, UK. Proceedings […]. Newcastle: The Sage Gateshead, 2012. p. 1-18.
RETRACTION database. The retraction watch database. New York, c2010. Disponível em: http://retractiondatabase.org/. Acesso em: 5 maio. 2021.
SANTOS-D’AMORIM, K. et al. Reasons and implications of retracted articles in Brazil. Transinformação, Campinas, v. 33, p. 1-16, 2021.
SANTOS-D’AMORIM, K.; MELO, R. R.; SANTOS, R. N. M. Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is academia spreading misinformation? Liinc em Revista, Rio de Janeiro, v. 17, n. 1, p. 1-19, 2021.
SANTOS-D'AMORIM, K.; WANG, T.; LUND, B.; SANTOS, R. N. M. From plagiarism to scientific paper mills: a profile of retracted articles within the SciELO Brazil collection. Ethics & Behavior, London, v. 32, p. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2141747
SCITE. Brooklyn, NY, c2022. Disponível em: https://scite.ai/. Acesso em: 1 dez. 2021.
SILVEIRA, M. A. A. Produção e distinção no domínio da organização e representação do conhecimento no Brasil. 2016. Tese (Doutorado em Comunicação e Informação) - Faculdade de Biblioteconomia e Comunicação, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2016.
TEIXEIRA, J. A. S.; DOBRÁNSZKI, J. Highly cited retracted papers. Scientometrics, Amsterdam, v. 110, n. 3, p. 1653-1661, 2017.
THEIS-MAHON, N. R.; BAKKER, C. J. The continued citation of retracted publications in dentistry. Journal of the Medical Library Association, Chicago, v. 108, n. 3, p. 389-397, 2020.
TSUKUMO, D. M. L. et al. Statement of retraction. Diabetes, New York, v. 65, p. 1126-11237, 2016.
WAGER, E. et al. Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Croatian Medical Journal, Zagrebe, v. 50, n. 6, p. 532-535, 2009.
VOOS, H.; DAGAEV, K. S. Are all citations equal? Or, did we op. cit. your idem? Journal of Academic Librarianship, Ann Arbor, v. 1, n. 6, p. 19-21, 1976.
ZHANG, J. et al. Effects of high-fat diet-induced adipokines and cytokines on colorectal cancer development. FEBS Open Bio, Hoboken, v. 9, n. 12, p. 2117-2125, 2019.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Karen Santos-d’Amorim, Rinaldo Ribeiro de Melo, Anna Elizabeth Galvão Coutinho Correia, Májory Miranda, Murilo Artur Araújo da Silveira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors will keep their copyright and grant the journal with the right of first publication, the work licensed under License Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which allows for the sharing of work and the recognition of authorship.
Authors can take on additional contracts separately for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal, such as publishing in an institutional repository, acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
The articles are open access and free. In accordance with the license, you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
