Construction and management of retraction stigma in retraction notices: an authorship-based investigation

Xu, Shaoxiong Brian; Hu, Guangwei

doi:10.1007/s12144-022-03738-z

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To provide practical implications for producing informative retraction notices and increasing transparency about the retraction handling process, we propose a retraction notice content inventory, as presented in (Xu & Hu, 2021, 2022a, 2022c. Given that their realization is likely to be subject to the availability of desired information, as well as retraction stakeholders' considerations of their own personal needs and interests, the three communicative purposes should be achieved in a hierarchical order, with literature correction being the top priority and the other two secondary ones, when it is impossible to fulfil them all at the same time.…”

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, to correct the literature, some sensitive information must be disclosed, which may also serve to deter potential offence. Although the two secondary communicative purposes conflict with each other, retraction notices can serve them simultaneously, as revealed by a recent analysis of 1,000 retraction notices (Xu & Hu, 2022a).…”

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9). However, a wide range of information covered in neither the COPE recommendation nor the Retraction Watch proposal has been identified in retraction notices (Hesselmann & Reinhart, 2021; Lin & Chen, 2022; Xu & Hu, 2021, 2022a). Additionally, some scholars (e.g., Andersen & Wray, 2021; Dougherty, 2018) call for disclosing other information in retraction notices.…”

Section: The Perennial Problem Of Opacity and Uninformativenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To provide practical implications for producing informative retraction notices and increasing transparency about the retraction handling process, we propose a retraction notice content inventory, as presented in Table 1. The development of the inventory drew on de jure and de facto contents of retraction notices from various data sources (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, n.d.; Andersen & Wray, 2021; Committee on Publication Ethics Council, 2019; Dougherty, 2018; European Association of Science Editors, 2022; Grey et al, 2022; Hesselmann & Reinhart, 2021; Lin & Chen, 2022; Oransky, 2015; Teixeira da Silva & Vuong, 2021; Xu & Hu, 2021, 2022a). The inventory consists of 25 information entries, which are categorized into five sections by information source.…”

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What to communicate in retraction notices is determined by the communicative purposes that retraction notices should achieve. In addition to correcting the literature (Committee on Publication Ethics Council, 2019), retraction notices should also deter retractable research due to misconduct by disclosing stigmatizing information and repair an undeservedly tarnished image by communicating destigmatizing information (Xu & Hu, 2021, 2022a, 2022c). Given that their realization is likely to be subject to the availability of desired information, as well as retraction stakeholders' considerations of their own personal needs and interests, the three communicative purposes should be achieved in a hierarchical order, with literature correction being the top priority and the other two secondary ones, when it is impossible to fulfil them all at the same time.…”

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

What to communicate in retraction notices?

2023

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retraction notices are widely criticized for pervasive opacity and uninformativeness.• Retraction notices as a high-stakes academic genre serve three communicative purposes, namely correcting the literature, deterring potential offence, and repairing the tarnished image.• A comprehensive content inventory of retraction notices is developed, drawing on de jure and de facto retraction notice contents.• Five criteria for disclosing information in retraction notices are proposed.• Retraction notices following the content inventory and the disclosure criteria can maximize their transparency.

show abstract

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Perennial Problem Of Opacity and Uninformativenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To provide practical implications for producing informative retraction notices and increasing transparency about the retraction handling process, we propose a retraction notice content inventory, as presented in Table 1. The development of the inventory drew on de jure and de facto contents of retraction notices from various data sources (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, n.d.; Andersen & Wray, 2021; Committee on Publication Ethics Council, 2019; Dougherty, 2018; European Association of Science Editors, 2022; Grey et al, 2022; Hesselmann & Reinhart, 2021; Lin & Chen, 2022; Oransky, 2015; Teixeira da Silva & Vuong, 2021; Xu & Hu, 2021, 2022a). The inventory consists of 25 information entries, which are categorized into five sections by information source.…”

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A New Solution: a Proposed Retraction Notice Content Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

What to communicate in retraction notices?

2023

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions?

Evans

et al. 2023

Sci Eng Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract