Recommended Web Resources on “Understanding the Complexities of Retractions”

UPDATED POST March 7, 2018: “Want to Tell if a Paper Has Been Retracted? Good Luck” (via Retraction Watch)
Interview with Caitlin Bakker and Amy Riegelman.
—
The January 2018 issue (Vol. 79 No.1) issue of C&RL News includes an annotated collection of recommended Internet resources about the “complexities of retractions.”
Title
Understanding the Complexities of Retractions: Recommended Resources
Authors
Amy Riegelman
University of Minnesota
Caitlin Bakker
University of Minnesota
Abstract

Reasons for retracted publications range from honest errors made by authors or publishers to research misconduct (e.g., falsified data, fraudulent peer review). A retraction represents a status change of a publication in the scholarly literature. Other examples of status changes include correction or erratum. A retraction could be initiated by many parties, including authors, institutions, or journal editors. The U.S. National Library of Medicine annually reports on the number of retracted publications indexed within PubMed. While the overall rate of retractions is still very small, retractions have increased considerably in the last decade from 97 retracted articles in 2006 to 664 in 2016.

Resources are Organized Into the Sections:

• Understanding Retractions
• Journal Guidelines and Best Practices
• Identifying Retractions
• More Eyeballs Effect: Access And Transparency

Direct to Full Text Article ||| PDF Version
See Also: Research Article: “Retracted Publications in Mental Health Literature: Discovery across Bibliographic Platforms”
by Amy Riegelman and Caitlin Bakker (University of Minnesota). Published on January 8, 2018

Filed under: Companies (Publishers/Vendors), Data Files, Interviews, Journal Articles, Libraries, National Libraries, News, Profiles, Reports