IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nas/journl/v119y2022pe2119086119.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers

Author

Listed:
  • Hao Peng

    (a School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;)

  • Daniel M. Romero

    (a School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;; b Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;; c Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;)

  • Emőke-Ágnes Horvát

    (d School of Communication, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208;; e McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208; and; f Northwestern University Institute on Complex Systems, Evanston, IL 60208)

Abstract

Scientific retraction has been on the rise recently. Retracted papers are frequently discussed online, enabling the broad dissemination of potentially flawed findings. Our analysis spans a nearly 10-y period and reveals that most papers exhaust their attention by the time they get retracted, meaning that retractions cannot curb the online spread of problematic papers. This is striking as we also find that retracted papers are pervasive across mediums, receiving more attention after publication than nonretracted papers even on curated platforms, such as news outlets and knowledge repositories. Interestingly, discussions on social media express more criticism toward subsequently retracted results and may thus contain early signals related to unreliable work.

Suggested Citation

  • Hao Peng & Daniel M. Romero & Emőke-Ágnes Horvát, 2022. "Dynamics of cross-platform attention to retracted papers," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119(25), pages 2119086119-, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:119:y:2022:p:e2119086119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.pnas.org/content/119/25/e2119086119.full
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eleonora Alabrese, 2022. "Bad Science: Retractions and Media Coverage," CESifo Working Paper Series 10195, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nas:journl:v:119:y:2022:p:e2119086119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.