共查询到18条相似文献，搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
2.
网络时代,许多报纸推出了专门的网络版.网络版报纸在应对读者撤稿要求时会面临诸多难题,例如侵权、诽谤等法律风险以及刊物声誉和社会责任等.文章探讨了美国网络版报纸在应对读者或当事人的撤稿要求时的几种处理方案,包括如何应对法院判决必须撤掉的稿件,如何应对过刊数字化上网后的撤稿要求,如何应对前编辑或记者的撤稿要求,如何应对评论、跟帖之类的撤稿要求等.继而指出,网络时代的美国报纸在应对撤稿要求时首先考虑的依然是法律风险,然后是刊物声誉和社会责任,同时也会考虑人情因素. 相似文献
3.
近年来,随着学术不端行为导致的撤稿事件频发,撤稿声明在中国SCI期刊上发表的数量也日渐增长.越来越多的期刊需要处理疑似学术不端行为稿件的撤稿事宜,编辑部面临着前所未有的挑战.本研究通过对2016-2020年间Web of Science数据库核心合集收录的中国SCI期刊(不含港澳台地区)刊发的撤稿声明进行调查,记录并分析了相关撤稿声明的信息,包括发表的期刊、期刊所属学科、发表时间及卷期号、题目、类型、被撤稿论文发表时间及其撤稿后的引用情况等.调查结果显示,我国SCI期刊的撤稿声明发文规范整体良好,但还有许多不足,期刊编辑部需要进一步提高撤稿意识、完善撤稿机制、规范撤稿要求,接轨国际标准,从而保证刊发论文的科学性和准确性,维护期刊的学术声誉,为建设世界一流科技期刊提供保障. 相似文献
4.
作为我国科技和文化事业的组成部分,科技期刊在促进科技进步与交流、繁荣社会主义文化方面发挥了重要作用.但由于各种主客观因素影响,科技期刊论文录用后作者申请撤稿现象时有发生,常常使期刊处于非常被动的状态.为此,本文通过分析科技期刊论文录用后作者申请撤稿的类型,总结其主要原因,提出加强科研诚信引导教育、完善出版全过程科研诚信建设,增强主动服务意识、避免信息不对称,提高撤稿成本、加大录用后作者恶意申请撤稿的惩处力度以及呼吁构建复合型学术评价体系对策建议,以期为同行提供借鉴,降低论文录用后的撤稿率,维护学术研究的严肃性. 相似文献
5.
通过对国内外医学期刊撤稿现象的调查,探讨撤稿的主要原因,并通过对国内外相关的理论及实践操作规范的考察,对我国医学期刊撤稿的操作流程提出建议。还探讨撤稿过程中期刊和编辑的作用,为今后相关的理论研究及实际操作提供参考。 相似文献
6.
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
7.
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
8.
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
9.
谈谈科技期刊的"撤稿声明" 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
科技期刊的"撤稿声明(retraction)"并不常见,但却十分重要。刊登撤稿声明的原因一般是科技论文出现了明显的错误或误差、虚构了不实数据、其实验结果不可重复等。刊登撤稿声明必须遵循规定的流程,同时内容应符合一定的格式要求。 相似文献
10.
11.
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While researchers with retracted papers – publications that are withdrawn because of significant errors or scientific misconduct – carry a permanent stain on their publishing records, understanding the causes and initiators of such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
12.
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
13.
近期,施普林格的大规模撤稿事件再次在学界引起广泛关注和讨论.本文探讨撤稿事件中涉及的出版伦理问题和学术期刊在对其进行质量控制中的责任和应对措施,并进一步分析事件中的各方责任,总结出学术期刊从中可以吸取的教训. 相似文献
14.
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
15.
学术期刊的纠错栏目:勘误·更正·撤稿 总被引：4，自引：2，他引：2
勘误、更正和撤稿是学术期刊的重要栏日.因它们的法律意义不同,产生的原因不同,所以,在刊登主体、内容、栏目安排和编排处理上既有相同之处,又有不同之处,对纠正学术期刊的错误起到重要的作用.这应引起学术期刊编辑的注意. 相似文献
16.
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2016,32(1):44-53
Retractions serve as one perspective of the publishing process, and can offer vast insight into the problems associated with basic research, with the traditional publishing platform, or with policies. Some established retraction guidelines exist, such as those established by the Committee on Publication Ethics, or COPE. This essay provides a perspective of stealth or silent retractions within the broader concept of retractions, and within the framework of the COPE retraction guidelines. The issue of opaque retraction notices, especially in the case of COPE members, as well as the prominence of questionable retraction policies among select “predatory” open access publishers, is emphasized. Select clear examples are provided. 相似文献
17.
《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
18.
Michel C. Atlas 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2004,92(2):242-250
Purpose: The purpose is to review the issue of retraction in the scientific literature and to examine the policies on retraction of major biomedical journals.Method: The historical background of this issue was investigated through a literature search. The Instructions to Authors of 122 major biomedical journals were reviewed for evidence of a policy on the retraction of articles. Editors of those journals with no mention of retraction in their Instructions to Authors were contacted by email and/or postal mail.Results: Sixty-two percent of the journals investigated did not post or report having a policy on issuing retractions. Only twenty-one (18%) did. The remainder did not post any policy and did not respond to inquiries.Discussion: Including policies in Instructions to Authors relating to the principled conduct of research and publication will improve the ethical environment in which the scientific community works. 相似文献