Articlegold2013

Why Growing Retractions Are (Mostly) a Good Sign

272 citations0/0 files storedPLoS Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

Academic integrity and plagiarism scientometrics and bibliometrics research Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

In a new Essay in the Research Integrity Series, Daniele Fanelli examines the evidence and possible reasons for the rising number of retractions. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 272 citations exist upstream.

References

2009How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data 2012Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications 2011Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries 2010Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data 2013Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?2011Retracted Science and the Retraction Index 2010Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing?2012Intended and unintended consequences of a publish‐or‐perish culture: A worldwide survey

Cited by

2020Exploratory Research 2015Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity 2022Responsible Conduct of Research 2017Post retraction citations in context: a case study 2014Financial costs and personal consequences of research misconduct resulting in retracted publications 2016The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles 2014Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-analysis of Surveys 2019The limitations of retraction notices and the heroic acts of authors who correct the scholarly record: An analysis of retractions of papers published from 1975 to 2019

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.