Retractions in Academic Discourse: From Stigma to the Culture of Responsibility in Science

Introduction. The increase in retractions of research articles is associated with the growth of publication activity and additional control over the quality of research, but this process is accompanied by negative stigmatization of authors. Discussions around retractions affect not only the issues of scientific ethics of authors, but also reputational risks for researchers and publishers. The purpose of the current article is to analyze the main reasons for retraction and typical policies of scientific journals on the implementation of the retraction process; to identify factors contributing to the stigmatization of authors whose works have been retracted, as well as ways to change the scientific culture aimed at reducing the negative impact of retractions. Journal policies on retraction. It highlights how scientific journals manage the retraction process, including the use of different notions, such as "partial retraction" or "self-retraction", which can mitigate the consequences of retraction. The stigmatization of retraction and its consequences for scientific knowledge. The negative effects of retractions on authors, including loss of trust among colleagues, reduced chances of receiving grants, and reputational damage, are discussed. The problem of uneven approach to retractions depending on the reason for retraction is considered. Retraction culture. Recommendations for creating a more transparent and constructive retraction system that would facilitate the correction of scientific literature without stigmatizing authors who have made errors in their work are summarized. Conclusion. The authors of the article emphasize the need to change the current academic culture, in which retractions are perceived as a stigmatizing factor. It is proposed to revise the retraction policy, make it more transparent and fair, and introduce a system of incentives for authors for timely correction of errors. This will strengthen trust in the scientific process and create conditions for a more responsible approach to publication ethics.