Retractions in academic publishing: insights from highly ranked global universities

Rahat Khan, Abhinav Joshi, Khushdeep Kaur, A. Sinhababu, Prof. Rupak Chakravarty
{"title":"Retractions in academic publishing: insights from highly ranked global universities","authors":"Rahat Khan, Abhinav Joshi, Khushdeep Kaur, A. Sinhababu, Prof. Rupak Chakravarty","doi":"10.1108/gkmc-01-2024-0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose\nThe study aims to profile the scientific retractions in the top five global universities and provide descriptive statistics on specific subjects.\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe data for reasons behind retractions is manually extracted from the Retraction Watch Database. The top five global universities according to the Times Higher Education global ranking of 2024 are selected for this study.\n\nFindings\nThe study found that Stanford University emerged with the highest number of retractions in the assessment across institutions in the field of basic life sciences and health sciences. Notably, the predominant reasons for these retractions were identified, with “unreliable results” being the most prevalent, accounting for 53 retractions. Following closely was the category of “errors in results and/or conclusions”, contributing to 51 retractions. MIT has the longest time between publication and retraction of any subject group, with an average of 1,701 days.\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis study has some limitations, as it only analysed the retractions of the top five global universities.\n\nOriginality/value\nThe study provides a comprehensive analysis of retractions in academic publishing, focusing on reasons, time gaps, article types and accessibility categories across prestigious universities. The paper underscores the critical role of retractions in maintaining the integrity of scientific literature, emphasizing the importance of transparent correction and responsible peer review to ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of published research. Results show that common reasons for retractions include duplication, fake peer review and plagiarism, underlining the need for ethical research standards.\n","PeriodicalId":507843,"journal":{"name":"Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication","volume":"3 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/gkmc-01-2024-0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The study aims to profile the scientific retractions in the top five global universities and provide descriptive statistics on specific subjects. Design/methodology/approach The data for reasons behind retractions is manually extracted from the Retraction Watch Database. The top five global universities according to the Times Higher Education global ranking of 2024 are selected for this study. Findings The study found that Stanford University emerged with the highest number of retractions in the assessment across institutions in the field of basic life sciences and health sciences. Notably, the predominant reasons for these retractions were identified, with “unreliable results” being the most prevalent, accounting for 53 retractions. Following closely was the category of “errors in results and/or conclusions”, contributing to 51 retractions. MIT has the longest time between publication and retraction of any subject group, with an average of 1,701 days. Research limitations/implications This study has some limitations, as it only analysed the retractions of the top five global universities. Originality/value The study provides a comprehensive analysis of retractions in academic publishing, focusing on reasons, time gaps, article types and accessibility categories across prestigious universities. The paper underscores the critical role of retractions in maintaining the integrity of scientific literature, emphasizing the importance of transparent correction and responsible peer review to ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of published research. Results show that common reasons for retractions include duplication, fake peer review and plagiarism, underlining the need for ethical research standards.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术出版中的撤稿:来自全球排名靠前的大学的启示
目的本研究旨在对全球排名前五的大学的科学撤稿情况进行剖析,并提供有关具体学科的描述性统计数据。研究结果研究发现,在基础生命科学和健康科学领域,斯坦福大学在各机构的评估中出现的撤稿数量最多。值得注意的是,这些撤稿的主要原因已被确定,其中 "结果不可靠 "是最普遍的原因,占撤稿总数的 53%。紧随其后的是 "结果和/或结论中的错误",共有 51 项撤稿。研究局限性/意义本研究存在一些局限性,因为它只分析了全球排名前五的大学的撤稿情况。原创性/价值本研究对学术出版中的撤稿情况进行了全面分析,重点关注各著名大学撤稿的原因、时间差、文章类型和可访问性类别。论文强调了撤稿在维护科学文献完整性方面的关键作用,强调了透明更正和负责任的同行评审对于确保已发表研究的可靠性和可信度的重要性。研究结果表明,撤稿的常见原因包括重复、虚假同行评审和剽窃,这凸显了研究道德标准的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Farmers’ access to agricultural information sources: a study of Lakadong turmeric farmers Understanding Malaysia’s perceived destination image formation through online user-generated content information qualities Farmers’ access to agricultural information sources: a study of Lakadong turmeric farmers Understanding Malaysia’s perceived destination image formation through online user-generated content information qualities Enhancing service delivery through digital transformation in the public sector in South Africa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1