IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v7y2024i2d10.1007_s42001-024-00278-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ripple effect of retraction on an author’s collaboration network

Author

Listed:
  • Kiran Sharma

    (BML Munjal University)

  • Satyam Mukherjee

    (Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence)

Abstract

Scientists involved in scientific misconduct may face social stigmatization, leading to isolation and limited opportunities for collaboration. The reputation of every individual is reflected on the team, as the fraud attempted by any member will be reflected on the team. Earlier studies pointed out the impact of citation penalty on the prior work of coauthors, the effect of retraction on a co-author’s research career, and stigmatization through mere association. This paper explores the formation and dynamics of the networks of authors who faced retractions and its ripple effect on their “innocent coauthors” who never faced retractions in their careers. Leveraging a dataset of 5972 retracted papers involving 24,209 authors, we investigate whether scientific misconduct reduces collaborative ties of misconducting authors as opposed to those who never faced allegations of academic misconduct. We observe that the network structure of authors involved in retractions does not change significantly over the years compared to that of the “innocent coauthors”. Our results suggest that stigmatization rarely affects the collaboration network of stigmatized authors. Our findings have implications for institutions adopting stringent measures and fostering ethical practices in research.

Suggested Citation

  • Kiran Sharma & Satyam Mukherjee, 2024. "The ripple effect of retraction on an author’s collaboration network," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 1519-1531, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:7:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-024-00278-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-024-00278-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-024-00278-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-024-00278-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xin Shuai & Jason Rollins & Isabelle Moulinier & Tonya Custis & Mathilda Edmunds & Frank Schilder, 2017. "A Multidimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(9), pages 2225-2236, September.
    2. Hussinger, Katrin & Pellens, Maikel, 2019. "Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 516-530.
    3. Azoulay, Pierre & Bonatti, Alessandro & Krieger, Joshua L., 2017. "The career effects of scandal: Evidence from scientific retractions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1552-1569.
    4. Philippe Mongeon & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Costly collaborations: The impact of scientific fraud on co-authors' careers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(3), pages 535-542, March.
    5. Jane Qiu, 2010. "Publish or perish in China," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7278), pages 142-142, January.
    6. Ava Kiai, 2019. "To protect credibility in science, banish “publish or perish”," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(10), pages 1017-1018, October.
    7. Bedoor AlShebli & Kinga Makovi & Talal Rahwan, 2020. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: The association between early career informal mentorship in academic collaborations and junior author performance," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    8. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Tekles, 2019. "Productivity does not equal usefulness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 705-707, February.
    9. Ginger Zhe Jin & Benjamin Jones & Susan Feng Lu & Brian Uzzi, 2019. "The Reverse Matthew Effect: Consequences of Retraction in Scientific Teams," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 492-506, July.
    10. Monya Baker, 2016. "1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility," Nature, Nature, vol. 533(7604), pages 452-454, May.
    11. Dan Garisto, 2023. "‘A very disturbing picture’: another retraction imminent for controversial physicist," Nature, Nature, vol. 620(7972), pages 14-16, August.
    12. Weihua Li & Sam Zhang & Zhiming Zheng & Skyler J. Cranmer & Aaron Clauset, 2022. "Untangling the network effects of productivity and prominence among scientists," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rainer Widmann & Michael E. Rose & Marina Chugunova, 2023. "Allegations of Sexual Misconduct, Accused Scientists, and Their Research," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 419, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Lingzi Feng & Junpeng Yuan & Liying Yang, 2020. "An observation framework for retracted publications in multiple dimensions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1445-1457, November.
    3. Horton, Joanne & Krishna Kumar, Dhanya & Wood, Anthony, 2020. "Detecting academic fraud using Benford law: The case of Professor James Hunton," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    4. Ivan Heibi & Silvio Peroni, 2021. "A qualitative and quantitative analysis of open citations to retracted articles: the Wakefield 1998 et al.'s case," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8433-8470, October.
    5. Eleonora Alabrese, 2022. "Bad Science: Retractions and Media Coverage," CESifo Working Paper Series 10195, CESifo.
    6. Kiran Sharma, 2021. "Team size and retracted citations reveal the patterns of retractions from 1981 to 2020," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8363-8374, October.
    7. Salandra, Rossella & Criscuolo, Paola & Salter, Ammon, 2021. "Directing scientists away from potentially biased publications: the role of systematic reviews in health care," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    8. Lu Liu & Benjamin F. Jones & Brian Uzzi & Dashun Wang, 2023. "Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1046-1058, July.
    9. March, Raymond J. & Geloso, Vincent, 2020. "Gordon Tullock meets Phineas Gage: The political economy of lobotomies in the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    10. Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2022. "How research institutions can make the best of scandals – once they become unavoidable," Post-Print hal-03908837, HAL.
    11. Xu, Haifeng & Ding, Yi & Zhang, Cheng & Tan, Bernard C.Y., 2023. "Too official to be effective: An empirical examination of unofficial information channel and continued use of retracted articles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    12. M. D. Ribeiro & S. M. R. Vasconcelos, 2018. "Retractions covered by Retraction Watch in the 2013–2015 period: prevalence for the most productive countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 719-734, February.
    13. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Tang, Li, 2019. "Pathogenic organization in science: Division of labor and retractions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 444-461.
    14. Joseph Klein, 2022. "Improving the reproducibility of findings by updating research methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1597-1609, June.
    15. Mohan, Vijay, 2019. "On the use of blockchain-based mechanisms to tackle academic misconduct," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    16. Hussinger, Katrin & Pellens, Maikel, 2019. "Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 516-530.
    17. Dennis Bontempi & Leonard Nuernberg & Suraj Pai & Deepa Krishnaswamy & Vamsi Thiriveedhi & Ahmed Hosny & Raymond H. Mak & Keyvan Farahani & Ron Kikinis & Andrey Fedorov & Hugo J. W. L. Aerts, 2024. "End-to-end reproducible AI pipelines in radiology using the cloud," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Sebastian Hager & Carlo Schwarz & Fabian Waldinger, 2024. "Measuring Science: Performance Metrics and the Allocation of Talent," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(12), pages 4052-4090, December.
    19. Daniele Fanelli, 2012. "Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 891-904, March.
    20. Zunino, Diego & van Praag, Mirjam C. & Dushnitsky, Gary, 2017. "Badge of Honor or Scarlet Letter? Unpacking Investors' Judgment of Entrepreneurs' Past Failure," IZA Discussion Papers 11017, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:spr:jcsosc:v:7:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s42001-024-00278-3. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.