Analysis of retractions in Indian science

An increasing problem throughout the world, plagiarism and related dishonest behaviors have been affecting Indian science for quite some time. To curb this problem, the Indian government has initiated a number of measures, such as providing plagiarism detecting software to all the universities for free. Still, however, many unfair or incorrect papers are published. For some time, publishers have used an efficient tool to deal with such situations: retractions. A published paper that is later discovered to not deserve publication—which can be for a number of reasons—can be withdrawn (and often removed from the online contents of the journal) by the publisher. This study aims (1) to identify retracted publications authored or co-authored by researchers affiliated to Indian institutions and (2) to analyze the reasons for the retractions. To meet these aims, we searched the SCOPUS database to identify retraction notices for articles authored or coauthored by Indian authors. The first retraction notice was issued back in 1996, an exceptionally early retraction, as the next one was published in 2005. Thus, we analyzed 239 retractions (195 from journals and 44 from conference proceedings) published between 2005 and 3 August 2018 (but most were published after 2010), in terms of the following qualitative retraction-wise parameters: the main reason for retraction, authorship, a collaboration level, collaborating countries, sources of retraction (a journal or conference proceedings), and funding sources of the research. We also detected journals with high retraction frequencies. Mainly two phrases—“Retraction notice to” and “Retracted Article”—were used to retract publications. The most frequent reason for retractions was plagiarism.

[1]  A. F. Adams,et al.  The Survey , 2021, Dyslexia in Higher Education.

[2]  Xiaotian Chen,et al.  Journal Retractions: Some Unique Features of Research Misconduct in China , 2018 .

[3]  Suresh K. Chauhan Research on Plagiarism in India during 2002-2016 : A Bibliometric Analysis , 2018 .

[4]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[5]  Hui Wang,et al.  Retracted Publications in the Biomedical Literature from Open Access Journals , 2019, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[6]  Deepayan Sarkar,et al.  Lattice: Multivariate Data Visualization with R , 2008 .

[7]  A. Abrizah,et al.  An analysis of Malaysian retracted papers: Misconduct or mistakes? , 2018, Scientometrics.

[8]  Bakthavachalam Elango,et al.  Top-cited articles in the field of tribology : A bibliometric analysis , 2018, COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management.

[9]  S. K. Sonkar,et al.  Analysing Retraction Notices of Scholarly Journals: A Study , 2018, DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology.

[10]  D. Dhingra,et al.  Publication misconduct among medical professionals in India. , 2014, Indian journal of medical ethics.

[11]  Y. Ho A bibliometric analysis of highly cited articles in materials science , 2014 .

[12]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Temporal characteristics of retracted articles , 2018, Scientometrics.

[13]  Y. Ho,et al.  A Bibliometric Analysis of Highly Cited Papers from India in Science Citation Index Expanded , 2017 .

[14]  B. Elango,et al.  Publication Trends and Citation Impact of Tribology Research in India: A Scientometric Study , 2014 .

[15]  S. C. Lakhotia,et al.  A Policy Statement on “Dissemination and Evaluation of Research Output in India” by the Indian National Science Academy (New Delhi) , 2018 .

[16]  Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos,et al.  Retractions covered by Retraction Watch in the 2013–2015 period: prevalence for the most productive countries , 2018, Scientometrics.

[17]  Tianwei He Retraction of global scientific publications from 2001 to 2010 , 2012, Scientometrics.

[18]  E. Callaway Publisher pulls 58 articles by Iranian scientists over authorship manipulation , 2016, Nature.

[19]  Praveen Chaddah,et al.  Not all plagiarism requires a retraction , 2014, Nature.

[20]  M. Ghert,et al.  Retractions in cancer research: a systematic survey , 2017, Research Integrity and Peer Review.

[21]  Sun Huh,et al.  Characteristics of Retractions from Korean Medical Journals in the KoreaMed Database: A Bibliometric Analysis , 2016, PloS one.

[22]  Adam Marcus,et al.  What Studies of Retractions Tell Us , 2014 .

[23]  O. Sharma Ethics in Science , 2015, Indian Journal of Microbiology.

[24]  A survey of retracted articles in dentistry , 2017, BMC Research Notes.

[25]  David C. Ison An empirical analysis of differences in plagiarism among world cultures , 2018, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management.

[26]  A. Casadevall,et al.  Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[27]  Sarah Necker Scientific Misbehavior in Economics: Unacceptable research practice linked to perceived pressure to publish. , 2014 .

[28]  Torgny Stigbrand,et al.  Retraction Note to multiple articles in Tumor Biology , 2017, Tumor Biology.

[29]  Ying Zhang,et al.  Lack of Improvement in Scientific Integrity: An Analysis of WoS Retractions by Chinese Researchers (1997–2016) , 2018, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[30]  Mapping of Breast Cancer Research in India:A Bibliometric Analysis , 2016 .

[31]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Global Nanotribology Research Output (1996–2010): A Scientometric Analysis , 2013, PloS one.

[32]  Martin Reinhart,et al.  The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles , 2016, Current sociology. La Sociologie contemporaine.

[33]  Behzad Ataie-Ashtiani,et al.  World Map of Scientific Misconduct , 2018, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[34]  Lawrence Mbuagbaw,et al.  Exploring the characteristics, global distribution and reasons for retraction of published articles involving human research participants: a literature survey , 2018, Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare.