共查询到18条相似文献，搜索用时 359 毫秒
1.
通过计算机检索万方和中国知网数据库2013—2018年被撤销的中文科技论文,统计被撤销论文的基本信息(发表期刊、论文题名、发表时间及卷期号、撤销时间、撤稿方、撤稿原因、编辑部处理方法及撤销后的引用情况等),调查我国中文科技论文被撤销的情况及撤销后论文继续被收录和引用的情况。共205篇被撤销科技论文纳入研究,涉及145种期刊。184篇(89.8%)来自自然科学类期刊;撤稿时滞为1～145个月;著作权、知识产权纠纷是撤稿最主要的原因;撤稿声明发布后还有59篇论文可以在数据库中在线阅读和下载全文,其中31篇论文依然被其他学者引用。结果表明期刊及相关学术机构应加强学术不端的审查和宣传,规范撤稿机制及流程。 相似文献
2.
本文对中国知网、万方数据库中检索到的撤稿声明进行逐条字段标记,以撤稿原因为主轴,对撤稿时序、撤稿驱动主体等进行交叉统计分析,并对中国知网、万方数据库的撤稿声明收录和原文处理情况进行比较研究,发现国内期刊撤稿特征表现为学术不端撤稿占比最大,学术不端撤稿隐性集中爆发风险大,作者驱动撤稿最多,数据库撤稿处理不规范.在此基础上为期刊、数据库的相关建设提出针对性的对策及建议:期刊的撤稿声明要明确撤稿原因,对作者自行撤稿行为应高度关注并加强监管,还需规范撤稿调查处理流程且做到科学有据;国内数据库要加强撤稿的规范化建设. 相似文献
3.
针对当前日渐增多的学术不端论文被撤销的现象,探讨中文学术期刊论文被撤销原因失真的一些现状:论文被撤销却未刊登撤销声明、撤销论文却未给出明确的原因和论文撤销的原因与实际不符等.认为被撤销论文原因失真由多方面因素造成:1)国家和行业层面,我国关于论文撤销的规范有待进一步健全;2)学术期刊层面,其调查权力和范围有限,担心事件调查的时间成本以及作者起诉等法律风险而使撤销原因失真,并存在撤销论文会引起读者质疑期刊权威性的误解;3)作者层面,涉及学术不端论文的作者为了减小学术不端行为对声誉的影响不愿坦诚其行为,而涉及诚实性错误的论文撤销作者可能怕读者质疑其学术能力而不愿意刊登原因.建议从制定论文撤销规范、规范学术期刊撤销行为和营造良性科研氛围等方面,促进我国学术环境的进一步净化. 相似文献
4.
以国家自然科学基金委员会查处的中文造假论文为例,基于引文内容分析其被其他文献引用的情况。调查表明:11篇中文造假论文共被有效引用34次;在定性为造假论文前被引用26次(占76.47%),在定性为造假论文后被引用8次(占23.53%,其中1次为负面引用);从引用情感来看,15次(占44.12%)为正面引用,18次(占52.94%)为中性引用,1次(占2.94%)为负面引用。建议加强发现造假论文的机构(个人)、作者单位与学术期刊等的沟通交流,督促造假论文尽快被撤销并在撤销声明中阐述具体原因;基于科学研究不断发展的特点以及学术不端行为长期存在的现状,科研工作者应具备质疑精神,对前人的研究结果进行借鉴和识别;关注造假论文的正面引用,应警惕连环造假行为。 相似文献
5.
6.
本文以中国知网提供的中国期刊全文数据库为统计源,对2002-2012年我国应用社会调查法的档案学论文进行统计分析,从论文的年度分布、期刊来源、研究主题、作者所属机构四个方面揭示了社会调查法在档案学中的应用现状和特点,并为今后档案学学者更好地运用社会调查法提出一些建议。 相似文献
7.
调查Web of Science核心合集收录的27种国际地学英文学术期刊2016—2020年刊发的更正声明,分析其多维度信息,即刊名、更正声明的数量、更正声明涉及的文献类型和题名及DOI号、更正的时间及卷期号、更正前原文献发表时间及其被引情况、更正声明的具体内容和被引情况、通信作者国别等。结果显示:国际地学英文学术期刊发布的更正声明规范性强,且数量呈逐年增长趋势;美国和中国作者发表的更正声明最多,但美国有下降趋势,而中国有上升趋势;绝大多数更正声明的责任主体是作者;更正对象涉及作者信息、文中信息、公式、致谢、参考文献、图、表格和附件等。为减轻错误内容的影响,学术期刊应提升更正声明的可发现性、提高更正声明的作者信息透明度、加强更正声明论文的审核;为规避更正反映的期刊质量问题,建议期刊和出版商协同严把论文评审关和编校关,加快更正声明的发表速度,并加强科研自律和科研道德规范,以提升学术期刊的学术质量和影响力。 相似文献
8.
统计发现2017年1月—2019年12月3大中文数据库共撤销54篇论文。撤销声明中撤销主体还算明确,但存在撤销原因不清晰问题;数据库存在撤销发布形式不统一,一个数据库撤销而另一数据库未撤销现象,易导致继续引用从而使错误信息继续传播。建议国家有关部门尽快对论文撤销声明的要求和格式制订规范,期刊和数据库按照规范提交和处理撤销论文。 相似文献
9.
分析PubMed数据库中撤销的造假论文的特征及学术净化效果.发现近10年间撤销造假论文433篇,分布在25个国家,日本最多,美国次之,其次是德国、印度和中国.造假论文分布在178种期刊上,主要涉及数据、图片造假.造假论文数量大致是逐年增长.撤销主体主要是作者、主编、编辑.造假论文撤销前后年均被引频次差异显著(P＜0.05).揭示了撤销的造假论文的主要分布特征及对学术界的净化效果.造假现象的严峻形势希望能够给研究者以警示,并强调作者、编辑在学术环境净化中的主体作用. 相似文献
10.
文章以中国知网数据库为依据,对有关我国图书馆婴幼儿服务已有的研究成果从发表时间、论文类型分布、发表期刊、作者等方面进行计量分析,从而揭示我国图书馆婴幼儿服务学术研究的现状. 相似文献
11.
在国际著名的摘要和引文数据库Scopus中检索2015-2017年医学领域国际期刊的撤稿声明,收集并分析撤稿声明中的相关信息.检索后共获得1 015篇针对已发表正式论文的撤稿声明,声明数量逐年减少.发表撤稿声明较多的期刊,普遍质量不高,撤稿数量和期刊影响因子并没有明显的相关性.从Scopus上可以获得能提供有效撤稿相关信息的声明摘要共409篇,涉及文章419篇,学术不端是撤稿的主要原因,占所有撤稿原因的46.8％.撤稿文章来自38个国家,其中数量最多的为中国(97篇)、美国(95篇)、伊朗(53篇)、日本(28篇)、印度(22篇)、英国(14篇)、韩国(11篇).几乎所有国家的撤稿原因中都包括学术不端或重复发表.撤稿声明时滞为0～26年,中位数2年,平均值3.3年.学术不端的撤稿时滞中位数为3年,重复发表的撤稿时滞中位数为1年. 相似文献
12.
Kathleen A. Amos 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2014,102(2):87-91
This study explored national differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication in retracted biomedical literature. The national affiliations of authors and reasons for retraction of papers accessible through PubMed that were published from 2008 to 2012 and subsequently retracted were determined in order to identify countries with the largest numbers and highest rates of retraction due to plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors from more than fifty countries retracted papers. While the United States retracted the most papers, China retracted the most papers for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Rates of plagiarism and duplicate publication were highest in Italy and Finland, respectively. Unethical publishing practices cut across nations. 相似文献
13.
Quan‐Hoang Vuong 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(2):119-130
While researchers with retracted papers – publications that are withdrawn because of significant errors or scientific misconduct – carry a permanent stain on their publishing records, understanding the causes and initiators of such retractions can shed a different light on the matter. This paper, based on a random sample of 2,046 retracted papers, which were published between 1975 and 2019, extracted from Retraction Watch and the websites of major publishers, shows that 53% of the retraction notices do not specify who initiated the retraction. Nearly 10% of the retraction notes either omit or do not contain information related to reasons for retractions. Furthermore, most of the retracted papers in our sample have no limitation section; those who do are commonly unhelpful or irrelevant. The results carry three implications for scientific transparency: retraction notices need to be more informative; limitation sections ought to be a required and even an open section of all published articles; and finally, promoting ‘heroic acts’ in science can positively change the current publishing culture. 相似文献
14.
随着生物医学领域文献发表量的快速增加,撤稿量也随之增加。本文通过检索PubMed收录的关于中国作者发表文章的撤稿文件,对其中的信息进行提取和统计学分析。结果显示:1)生物医学领域中国作者撤稿在2005年后进入快速增长,平均撤稿时间为16.55月,撤稿主要集中在影响因子为0～3的期刊(58.9％)。2)撤稿原因分别为重复发表或抄袭(40%),科学错误(15％),作者署名或版权问题(8%),伪造数据或怀疑伪造数据(5%)。3)因科学错误、重复发表或抄袭、伪造数据或怀疑伪造数据而撤稿的期刊平均影响因子之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。4)非SCI给出不详撤稿信息的比例明显高于SCI期刊(P<0.05)。撤稿行为是对缺陷科学结论纠错的有效措施,从PubMed收录的对中国作者的撤稿声明分析中可以发现某些中国作者科学失范行为的模式,以及科技期刊编辑部对待撤稿的态度,并可借鉴经验制定出有针对性的措施,促进国内期刊出版环境的净化。 相似文献
15.
刊登撤稿声明是学术期刊配合学术打假的重要手段。分析从国内数据库中检索到的45篇撤稿声明和被撤的55篇论文,发现因各种学术不端引起的撤稿占64％,大多数被撤论文仍能在数据库中找到全文。初步探讨了被撤论文的特点和发布撤稿声明时应注意的问题。 相似文献
16.
《Journal of Informetrics》2023,17(3):101423
Retractions are necessary to remove flawed research from citable literature but cannot offset the negative impact those publications have on science advances and public trust. The editorial peer-review process is intended to prevent flawed research from being published. However, there is limited empirical evidence of its effectiveness in identifying issues that lead to retractions. This study analyzed the peer-review comments (provided by Clarivate Analytics) for a sample of retracted publications (provided by Retraction Watch) to investigate how the peer-review process effectively detects the areas where the retraction causes lie and whether reviewer characteristics are related to the effectiveness. We found that a small proportion of peer reviews suggested rejections during the peer review stage, while about half suggested acceptance or minor revision for those later retracted papers. The peer-review process was more effective in identifying retraction causes related to data, methods, and results than those related to text plagiarism and references. Additionally, factors such as reviewer seniority and the level of match between reviewers’ expertise and the submission were significant in determining the possibility of peer reviews identifying suspicious areas in submissions. We discussed potential insights from these findings and called for collective efforts to prevent retractions. 相似文献
17.
During the past twenty years, more than ninety retraction notices have been published in biomedical journals. These retractions constitute a unique body of literature that biomedical researchers, bibliographers, and librarians must monitor to reduce scientific use of retracted, invalid papers. An analysis of medical retraction notices shows that very few are prominent in style, format, or placement, in spite of authoritative publication standards formulated by the International Council of Medical Journal Editors. Although researchers are ultimately responsible for the validity of the information they cite in their own publications, biomedical librarians are in a unique position to educate their patrons regarding retracted papers. 相似文献
18.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(3):101304
The way retracted papers have been mentioned in post-retraction citations reflects the perception of the citing authors. The characteristics of post-retraction citations are therefore worth studying to provide insights into the prevention of the citation chain of retracted papers. In this study, full-text analysis is used to compare the distinctions of citation location and citation sentiment—attitudes and dispositions toward the cited work—between the conditions of correctly mentioning the retracted status (called CM) and not mentioning the retracted status (called NM). Statistical test is carried out to explore the effect of CM on post-retraction citations in the field of psychology. It is shown that the citation sentiment of CM is equally distributed as negative, neutral, and positive, while for NM, it is mainly distributed as the latter two. CM papers tend to cite retracted papers in Methodology, whereas NM papers cite more in Theoretical Background and Conclusion. The perception efficiency of retractions in psychology is low, where the average unaware duration (UD, the period between when the retraction note has been published and when the first citation directly pointed out its retracted status) lasts for 2.88 years. Also, UD is negatively correlated with the quantity of CM and the growth rate of NM, the proportionate change of NM before and after the first CM paper appears (P <0.01). After being aware of retractions, the average rate of change (ARC, the total change divided by its taken time) of NM declines significantly (Z=-2.823, P <0.01) whereas CM sees a raise in most disciplines, which contributes to the reduction of possible interdisciplinary impact. 相似文献