Jodi Schneider University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign jodi@illinois.edu jschneider@pobox.com
Nathan D. Woods
Randi Proescholdt
Yuanxi Fu
RISRS Team
Source
via MetaArxiv. DOI: 10.31222/osf.io/ms579 July 28, 2021
Abstract
Retracted research is published work that is withdrawn, removed, or otherwise invalidated from the scientific and scholarly record. This may occur for many different reasons, which can include error, misconduct, or fraud. Retracting research is intended to stop its continued citation and use, but many retracted papers continue to be used.
Retracted research that is integrated into the scientific publication network via citations—either before or after retraction—enables the inadvertent propagation of potentially unsupported or fabricated data, fundamental errors, and unreproducible results, or can lead to misattribution of results or ideas (e.g., in cases of retraction due to dual publication, plagiarism, or ownership). Research over the past decade has identified a number of factors contributing to the unintentional spread of retracted research. Many retracted papers are not marked as retracted on publisher and aggregator sites, and retracted articles may still be found in readers’ PDF libraries, including in reference management systems such as Zotero, EndNote, and Mendeley. Most publishers do not systematically surveil bibliographies of submitted manuscripts, and most editors do not query whether a citation to a retracted paper is justified. When citing retracted papers, authors frequently do not indicate retraction status in bibliographies or in-text citations.
The goal of the Reducing the Inadvertent Spread of Retracted Science: Shaping a Research and Implementation Agenda (RISRS) project is to develop an actionable agenda for reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science. This includes identifying how the gatekeepers of scientific publications can monitor and disseminate retraction status and determining what other actions are feasible and relevant.
The RISRS process included an exploratory environment scan, a scoping review of empirical literature, and successive rounds of stakeholder consultation, culminating in a three-part online workshop (October 26, November 9, and November 16, 2020) that brought together a diverse body of 70 stakeholders to engage in collaborative problem solving and dialogue. Workshop discussions were seeded by materials derived from stakeholder interviews and short original discussion pieces contributed by stakeholders. The online workshop resulted in a set of recommendations to address the complexities of retracted research throughout the scholarly communications ecosystem. Recommendations were iteratively updated and developed through a series of surveys and drafts as well as at a followup meeting online February 16, 2021.
Source: 10.31222/osf.io/ms579
The RISRS team solicited feedback from presentations to NISOPlus, the Society for Scholarly Publishing, and the European Association of Science Editors. Implementation actions have started through a COPE task force on taxonomy and discussions about a proposed National Information Standards Organization (NISO) Work Item. We welcome your feedback via the project website https://infoqualitylab.org/projects/risrs2020/ or by email to jodi@illinois.edu. We encourage you to disseminate these recommendations and to envision how you, in your role, and in collaborative partnerships, can make a difference. For instance, you might help form a professional working group to further develop or refine these recommendations; present about retraction and related issues at professional and academic meetings; take on an implementation or policy project; or outline further research to be conducted.
Recommendations
1. Develop a systematic cross-industry approach to ensure the public availability of consistent, standardized, interoperable, and timely information about retractions.
2. Recommend a taxonomy of retraction categories/classifications and corresponding retraction metadata that can be adopted by all stakeholders.
3. Develop best practices for coordinating the retraction process to enable timely, fair, unbiased outcomes.
4. Educate stakeholders about publication correction processes including retraction and about pre- and post-publication stewardship of the scholarly record.
Gary Price (gprice@gmail.com) is a librarian, writer, consultant, and frequent conference speaker based in the Washington D.C. metro area.
He earned his MLIS degree from Wayne State University in Detroit.
Price has won several awards including the SLA Innovations in Technology Award and Alumnus of the Year from the Wayne St. University Library and Information Science Program. From 2006-2009 he was Director of Online Information Services at Ask.com. Gary is also the co-founder of infoDJ an innovation research consultancy supporting corporate product and business model teams with just-in-time fact and insight finding.
The article linked below was recently published by Urban Library Journal. Title What are Library Graduate Students Learning about Disability and Accessibility?: A Syllabus Analysis Author JJ Pionke University of ...
Connecticut: CT Librarians Raise Their Voices About Banned Books. ‘We Don’t Have Porn.’ (via CT Post) Illinois and Iowa Propose Book Ban Legislation With Opposing Goals (via WQAD) Iowa: Librarian ...
From the Associated Press: A roundup of some of the most popular but completely untrue stories and visuals of the week. None of these are legit, even though they were ...
We Will Be Updating this Post with Media Reports, Statements, Analysis, etc. as They Become Available Statements Association of American Publishers “Publishers Prevail in Summary Judgement Against Internet Archive for ...
The article linked below was published today by the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). Title The Case of the Disappearing Librarians: Analyzing Documentation of Librarians’ Contributions to Systematic ...
A new Access 2 Perspectives podcast is now online. The conversation is hosted by Dr. Jo Havemann. From the Podcast Description Vinodh Ilangovan and Jennifer D’Souza work on the Open Research ...
AI Tools Are Generating Convincing Misinformation. Engaging with Them Means Being on High Alert (via The Conversation) Guests at the Next DPLA Open Board + Community Meeting (April 10, 2023) ...
From the American Library Association: The American Library Association (ALA) today released new data documenting* 1,269 demands to censor library books and resources in 2022, the highest number of attempted book ...
From a PSU Libraries Blog Post: Penn State University Libraries has announced the relaunch of an expanded Judy Chicago Research Portal, a searchable gateway to the archives of this prominent feminist ...
Clarivate Announces Gordon Samson as President, Intellectual Property and Nominates Dr. Saurabh Saha as New Independent Director Here Come the First ChatGPT Plugins (via OpenAI); More via TechCrunch Illinois House ...
From the U.S. National Academy of Science: Registration is now open for the Nobel Prize Summit Truth, Trust and Hope — which will convene Nobel Prize laureates and other world-renowned experts and ...
From the Associated Press (AP): A powerful Missouri state lawmaker on Tuesday moved to strip state funding for public libraries over a fight about books. Republican House Budget Committee Chairman ...