Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications

Нарушения научной добросовестности являются причиной большинства отзывов научных публикаций
Ferric C. Fang, R. Grant Steen, Arturo Casadevall
2012-10-01

duplicate publicationplagiarismpublication fraudresearch misconductscientific retractions
A detailed review of all 2,047 biomedical and life-science research articles indexed by PubMed as retracted on May 3, 2012 revealed that only 21.3% of retractions were attributable to error. In contrast, 67.4% of retractions were attributable to misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud (43.4%), duplicate publication (14.2%), and plagiarism (9.8%). Incomplete, uninformative or misleading retraction announcements have led to a previous underestimation of the role of fraud in the ongoing retraction epidemic. The percentage of scientific articles retracted because of fraud has increased ∼10-fold since 1975. Retractions exhibit distinctive temporal and geographic patterns that may reveal underlying causes.
1
A review of 2,047 PubMed-indexed biomedical and life-science retractions found that 67.4% were attributable to misconduct.
2
Incomplete or misleading retraction notices previously caused substantial underestimation of fraud’s contribution to the retraction epidemic.
3
Misconduct-related retractions included fraud or suspected fraud (43.4%), duplicate publication (14.2%), and plagiarism (9.8%).
4
Only 21.3% of retractions resulted from scientific error, substantially fewer than those linked to misconduct.
5
The proportion of articles retracted for fraud increased approximately tenfold between 1975 and 2012, with temporal and geographic patterns suggesting underlying causal factors.

Retracted biomedical and life-science research articles indexed by PubMed

The causes, prevalence, temporal increase, and geographic patterns of retractions, particularly misconduct, fraud, duplicate publication, and plagiarism

Publication Details
Publication Date
2012-10-01
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
Ferric C. Fang
R. Grant Steen
Arturo Casadevall
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%