Open Access

Amend: an integrated platform of retracted papers and concerned papers

Menghui Li

Menghui Li

National Science Library, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Li, Menghui
, 
Fuyou Chen

Fuyou Chen

National Science Library, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Chen, Fuyou
, 
Sichao Tong

Sichao Tong

  • National Science Library, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
  • Department of Information Resources Management, School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Tong, Sichao
, 
Liying Yang

Liying Yang

  • National Science Library, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
  • Department of Information Resources Management, School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Yang, Liying
 and 
Zhesi Shen

Zhesi Shen

  • National Science Library, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
  • Department of Information Resources Management, School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijing, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Shen, Zhesi
  
May 27, 2024
Amend: an integrated platform of retracted papers and concerned papers's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Download Cover
Article Category: Research Papers
Published Online: May 27, 2024
Page range: 41 - 55
Received: Feb 20, 2024
Accepted: Mar 14, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2024-0012
Keywords
© 2024 Menghui Li et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1.

The annual trend of retractions. (a) For year of retraction. (b) For year of publication.
The annual trend of retractions. (a) For year of retraction. (b) For year of publication.

Figure 2.

The annual evolution of retraction rate.
The annual evolution of retraction rate.

Figure 3.

The annual evolution of misconduct reasons.
The annual evolution of misconduct reasons.

The number of retractions attributed to each reason in the year of publication_

Reasons 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Falsification 81 91 85 118 101 101 82 90 141 148 128 83 30
Fabrication 68 81 78 81 55 48 61 69 59 54 58 49 27
Plagiarism 125 96 157 160 195 220 194 208 203 191 181 183 88
Fake Peer-review 10 28 51 119 194 162 86 125 221 196 724 2,774 7,592
Paper Mill 1 3 1 8 64 89 75 179 416 594 460 288 98
AIGC 4 1 3 1 7 7 8 21 55 46 289 521 194
Inappropriate Authorship 24 26 34 52 72 132 112 128 104 123 173 230 191
Duplication 231 314 319 354 367 425 396 452 547 614 535 315 138
Ethical Violations 23 19 18 31 29 22 30 45 54 63 74 161 369
Other Misconducts 56 61 88 103 100 100 111 119 135 179 283 567 2,466

Characteristics of Amend dataset for retreated papers_

Retraction Retraction Rate Misconduct Misconduct Rate Ratio
Retraction 32,515 6.64 26,620 5.44 81.87%
Gold 14,519 16.38 13,487 15.21 92.89%
Non-Gold 17,996 4.49 13,133 3.28 72.98%

Frequency and proportion of reasons for academic misconduct retraction

Reason Frequency Percent Reason Frequency Percent
Falsification 1,712 4.83% AIGC 1,176 3.82%
Fabrication 1,568 4.42% Inappropriate Authorship 1,562 4.41%
Plagiarism 2,648 7.47% Duplication 6,152 17.36%
Fake Peer-review 12,413 35.02% Ethical Violations 1,130 3.12%
Paper Mill 2,283 6.44% Other Misconduct 4,798 13.54%
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Computer Sciences, Information Technology, Project Management, Databases and Data Mining
Journal RSS Feed