Advertisement

Why Articles in Arts and Humanities Are Being Retracted?

  • Gali HaleviEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article describes some of the characteristics of retracted articles in Arts and Humanities. A total 129 retracted articles in Arts and Humanities journals were identified using Retraction Watch and Scopus and then analyzed. The analysis shows that the main reasons for retracting Arts and Humanities articles is recycling and plagiarism. The analysis also shows that retracted articles continue to be read, downloaded and cited as well as mentioned in social media channels.

Keywords

Retracted articles Scientific misconduct Plagiarism Content recycling PlumX 

Notes

References

*Note that retracted articles mentioned in this article are not included in the reference list. This is done in order to avoid their continuous citations

  1. 1.
    Almeida RMV, de Albuquerque Rocha K, Catelani F, Fontes-Pereira AJ, Vasconcelos SM. Plagiarism allegations account for most retractions in major Latin American/Caribbean databases. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016;22(5):1447–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amos KA. The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations. J Med Libr Assoc: JMLA. 2014;102(2):87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bar-Ilan J, Halevi G. Post retraction citations in context: a case study. Scientometrics. 2017;113(1):547–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bar-Ilan J, Halevi G. Temporal characteristics of retracted articles. Scientometrics. 2018;116(3):1771–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biagioli M, Kenney MM, Martin BR, Walsh J. Academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming: a reassessment. Res Policy. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Budd JM, Sievert M, Schultz TR, Scoville C. Effects of article retraction on citation and practice in medicine. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1999;87(4):437–43.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Casadevall A, Steen RG, Fang FC. Sources of error in the retracted scientific literature. FASEB J. 2014;28(9):3847–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cokol M, Ozbay F, Rodriguez-Esteban R. Retraction rates are on the rise. EMBO Rep. 2008;9(1):2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Corbyn Z. Misconduct is the main cause of life-sciences retractions. Nature. 2012;490(7418):21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Decullier E, Huot L, Samson G, Maisonneuve H. Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study. BMC Res Notes. 2013;6(1):238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fabula É de recherche. Fabula, Atelier littéraire: Plagiat sans fard [Text]. n.d. https://www.fabula.org/atelier.php?Plagiat_sans_fard. Retrieved 13 Nov 2019.
  12. 12.
    Fanelli D, Costas R, Fang FC, Casadevall A, Bik EM. Why do scientists fabricate and falsify data? A matched-control analysis of papers containing problematic image duplications. 2017. BioRxiv 126805.  https://doi.org/10.1101/126805.
  13. 13.
    Fang FC, Casadevall A. Retracted science and the retraction index. Infect Immun. 2011;79(10):3855–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109(42):17028–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Akazhanov NA, Kitas GD. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croat Med J. 2014;55(1):61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Glänzel W, Braun T, Schubert A, Zosimo-Landolfo G. Coping with copying. Scientometrics. 2015;102(1):1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lariviere V, Gingras Y. On the prevalence and scientific impact of duplicate publications in different scientific fields (1980–2007). J Doc. 2010;66(2):179–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Madlock-Brown CR, Eichmann D. The (lack of) impact of retraction on citation networks. Sci Eng Ethics. 2014;21(1):127–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marcus A, Oransky I. What studies of retractions tell us. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2014;15(2):151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Masic I. Plagiarism in scientific publishing. Acta Inform Medica. 2012;20(4):208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Overlapping publications and self-plagiarism – Forskerportalen.dk. n.d. https://forskerportalen.dk/en/overlapping-publications-and-self-plagiarism/. Retrieved 28 Aug 2019.
  22. 22.
    Retraction Watch Database. n.d. http://retractiondatabase.org/RetractionSearch.aspx?. Retrieved 18 Jan 2019.
  23. 23.
    Smart P, Gaston T. How prevalent are plagiarized submissions? Global survey of editors. Learn Publ. 2019;32(1):47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steen RG. Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud? J Med Ethics. 2011;37(2):113–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Williams P, Wager E. Exploring why and how journal editors retract articles: findings from a qualitative study. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013;19(1):1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Icahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations