Link between misconduct and retractions 'bigger than thought'

Research misconduct accounts for a much higher proportion of retractions in biomedical literature than previously believed, a new study has concluded.

October 2, 2012

The study, published yesterday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, concludes that just over 67 per cent of retractions in recent decades are attributable to misconduct or suspected misconduct. This amounts to three quarters of retractions whose cause is known.

More than 43 per cent of all retractions were attributable to fraud or suspected fraud, while duplicate publication accounted for 14 per cent and plagiarism for 10 per cent.

Only 21 per cent of retractions were attributable to error.

The study was carried out by Arturo Casadevell, a professor at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York; Ferric Fang, professor of microbiology at the University of Washington, and medical communications consultant Grant Steen. The former two authors are both journal editors.

The study is based on more than 2,000 papers listed in the PubMed database as having been retracted since 1977.

Rather than relying on the retraction notices, the authors studied reports by the US Office of Research Integrity, as well as press articles and the Retraction Watch blog. They found that a significant proportion of retractions whose stated cause was scientific error were actually the result of misconduct.

“Incomplete, uninformative or misleading retraction announcements have led to a previous underestimation of the role of fraud in the ongoing retraction epidemic,” they say.

They also found that the proportion of articles retracted because of fraud has increased tenfold since 1975, with a particularly “dramatic rise” occurring in the last decade.

They found that most of the papers retracted for fraud were published in higher impact factor journals and originated from the US, Germany and Japan. Most of the papers retracted for plagiarism and duplicate publication came from the US, India and China, and were published in lower impact factor journals.

“This finding may reflect the greater scrutiny accorded to articles in high-impact journals and the greater uncertainty associated with cutting-edge research. Alternatively, the disproportionately high payoffs to scientists for publication in prestigious venues can be an incentive to perform work with excessive haste or to engage in unethical practices,” the paper says.

The highest number of retractions - 70 - appeared in Science, with other high-impact journals such as Nature, Cell and the New England Journal of Medicine all figuring in the top ten. However, Science was only third for retractions due to fraud or suspected fraud: higher numbers were recorded by the Journal of Biological Chemistry and Anesthesia & Analgesia.

The authors say that although only around 1 in 28,000 of the 25 million articles referenced in PubMed have been retracted for fraud, only a “fraction” of fraudulent articles are ever retracted.

paul.jump@tsleducation.com

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Assistant Recruitment - Human Resources Office

University Of Nottingham Ningbo China

Outreach Officer

Gsm London

Professorship in Geomatics

Norwegian University Of Science & Technology -ntnu

Professor of European History

Newcastle University

Head of Department

University Of Chichester
See all jobs

Most Commented

men in office with feet on desk. Vintage

Three-quarters of respondents are dissatisfied with the people running their institutions

students use laptops

Researchers say students who use computers score half a grade lower than those who write notes

Canal houses, Amsterdam, Netherlands

All three of England’s for-profit universities owned in Netherlands

sitting by statue

Institutions told they have a ‘culture of excluding postgraduates’ in wake of damning study

A face made of numbers looks over a university campus

From personalising tuition to performance management, the use of data is increasingly driving how institutions operate