A retraction is “a public statement made about an earlier statement that withdraws, cancels, refutes, diametrically reverses the original statement or ceases and desists from publishing the original statement. The retraction may be initiated by the editors of a journal, or by the author(s) of the papers (or their institution)”*.
In collaboration with E Decullier, Prof Hervé Maisonneuve from the University of Lyon (France), author of the “medical and scientific writing Blog“, has suggested a standard retraction form which can be downloaded here.
This Standard Retraction Form will be discussed at COPE Forum on Tuesday 23 September 2014.
Grant Steen and colleagues have reported in PLOS ONE that the number of scientific retractions has increased (Figure below showing retraction as a function of total publication).
The authors who have examined the interval between publication and retraction for 2,047 retracted articles indexed in PubMed, showed that:
“The increase in retracted articles appears to reflect changes in the behavior of both authors and institutions. Lower barriers to publication of flawed articles are seen in the increase in number and proportion of retractions by authors with a single retraction. Lower barriers to retraction are apparent in an increase in retraction for “new” offenses such as plagiarism and a decrease in the time-to-retraction of flawed work.”
The author have previously shown in an article published in PNAS that scientific fraud and misconducts accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications (Fig. 2)
In relation to this proposal, RetractionWatch Blog published “What should an ideal retraction notice look like? We (and COPE) want your input”.
Related articles in French
COPE is seeking for your feedbacks – Join the COPE Discussion at this URL
* source: Wikipedia