Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020 : Does a fraud lead to another fraud?

Kiran Sharma

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2011.13091

Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020 : Does a fraud lead to another fraud?

Kiran Sharma

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications and this database reveals the disturbing trend in science~\citep{fang2012misconduct, brainard2018massive}. The objective of the study is to find the association among the authors' collaboration, the number of retracted papers, the number of retracted citations, journal impact factor, and research areas. We present a detailed analysis of 12231 research papers indexed by Web of Science (WoS) as retracted publications from 1981-2020. The study demonstrates the collaboration patterns of retracted publications where 61.5% of authors have only one and 24.6% have two retracted papers; however, 2% of authors have more than 10 retracted papers. To study the impact of citing retracted papers, we investigated the retracted papers with citations. The study reveals that 55.2% of retracted papers have been cited at least once, where 25.4% of papers are such papers where at least one citation turned out to be a retraction. This shows the impact of scientific misconduct or fraud on new research. The number of retractions is independent of the journal impact factor and as compared to high impact papers, low impact papers are attracting more citations. We also investigate the citations received by retracted papers published in higher as well as lower impact factor journals. 1/4th of the papers are retracted citations that cited the retracted papers; however, there is no significant relationship exists between the higher impact or lower impact journals with retractions or citations. Finally, how the average team size and average retracted citations vary among different research areas are studied. The study provides an insight that how a fraud leads to another fraud in the scientific world. Also, the rising trend of citations of retracted papers is a serious concern.

Explore related subjects

cs.DL cs.IR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Kiran Sharma. 2020-11-26. Patterns of retractions from 1981-2020 : Does a fraud lead to another fraud?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.13091

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

From Funding to Findings (FIND): An Open Database of NSF Awards and Research Outputs

Public funding plays a central role in driving scientific discovery. To better understand the link between research inputs and outputs, we introduce FIND (Funding-Impact NSF Database), an open-access dataset that systematically links NSF grant proposals to their downstream research outputs, including publication metadata and abstracts. The primary contribution of this project is the creation of a large-scale, structured dataset that enables transparency, impact evaluation, and metascience research on the returns to public funding. To illustrate the potential of FIND, we present two proof-of-concept NLP applications. First, we analyze whether the language of grant proposals can predict the subsequent citation impact of funded research. Second, we leverage large language models to extract scientific claims from both proposals and resulting publications, allowing us to measure the extent to which funded projects deliver on their stated goals. Together, these applications highlight the utility of FIND for advancing metascience, informing funding policy, and enabling novel AI-driven analyses of the scientific process.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Geometric Signatures of Conceptual Reorganization: A Counterfactual Embedding Framework for Detecting Scientific Revolutions

We introduce document embedding geometry as a quantitative observable of conceptual reorganization and develop a counterfactual ablation framework for measuring how individual concepts influence the organization of scientific knowledge, providing a quantitative framework for detecting scientific revolutions. The observable is defined by the geometric perturbation induced when removing documents associated with a candidate concept from the embedding space before and after its historical emergence. Statistical validation is performed using five historical case studies spanning physics, mathematics, and machine learning: special relativity, Gödel's incompleteness theorems, the Higgs mechanism, deep learning, and the attention mechanism underlying transformer architectures. Across the historical case studies, the framework identifies measurable geometric signatures associated with conceptual reorganization, while the validation studies expose important limitations arising from document assignment and sparse historical data. These results establish embedding geometry as a medium for quantifying conceptual reorganization, providing a new approach for studying how scientific fields restructure over time.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2026

Toward non-textual representation of social anthropology: Modeling cultures as knowledge graphs

The study examines the emerging field of knowledge representation in the context of the semantic web and linked data, with a focus on knowledge produced within the social sciences - particularly in sociocultural anthropology. It starts from the premise that natural language, especially its textualized form, has long been the primary vehicle for producing and communicating anthropological research. Informed by theoretical approaches from information science, the study explores how computational methods may offer alternative modes of structuring and representing anthropological knowledge. It challenges the dominance of text as the sole representational medium and highlights the potential of semantic modeling to open new epistemological pathways. At the same time, it acknowledges the conceptual and methodological challenges involved in such a transition. This approach shifts emphasis away from metrics and programming, foregrounding processes of conceptualization, semantics, meaning, and reasoning as key to engaging with anthropological knowledge in digital environments.

cs.DL↗