Opening the black box of article retractions: exploring the causes and consequences of data management errors

The retraction of an article is probably the most severe outcome of a scientific project. While great emphasis has been placed on articles retracted due to scientific misconduct, studies show many retractions are due to honest errors. Unfortunately, in most cases, retraction notices do not provide sufficient information to determine the specific types and causes of these errors. In our study, we explored the research data management (RDM) errors that led to retractions from the authors' perspectives. We collected responses from 97 researchers from a broad range of disciplines using a survey design. Our exploratory results suggest that just about any type of RDM error can lead to the retraction of a paper, and these errors can occur at any stage of the data management workflow. The most frequently occurring cause of an error was inattention. The retraction was an extremely stressful experience for the majority of our sample, and most surveyed researchers introduced changes to their data management workflow as a result. Based on our findings, we propose that researchers revise their data management workflows as a whole instead of focusing on certain aspects of the process, with particular emphasis on tasks vulnerable to human fallibility.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Royal Society Open Science
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240844
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Opening the black box of article retractions: exploring the causes and consequences of data management errors

Russell A. Poldrack, Balázs Aczél, Márton Kovács, Dominik Dianovics et al.
5 citations
Royal Society Open Science
Academic integrity and plagiarism
2.63
article

Opening the black box of article retractions: exploring the causes and consequences of data management errors

Russell A. Poldrack, Balázs Aczél, Márton Kovács, Dominik Dianovics, Marton Aron Varga
article en
5 citations

Abstract

The retraction of an article is probably the most severe outcome of a scientific project. While great emphasis has been placed on articles retracted due to scientific misconduct, studies show many retractions are due to honest errors. Unfortunately, in most cases, retraction notices do not provide sufficient information to determine the specific types and causes of these errors. In our study, we explored the research data management (RDM) errors that led to retractions from the authors' perspectives. We collected responses from 97 researchers from a broad range of disciplines using a survey design. Our exploratory results suggest that just about any type of RDM error can lead to the retraction of a paper, and these errors can occur at any stage of the data management workflow. The most frequently occurring cause of an error was inattention. The retraction was an extremely stressful experience for the majority of our sample, and most surveyed researchers introduced changes to their data management workflow as a result. Based on our findings, we propose that researchers revise their data management workflows as a whole instead of focusing on certain aspects of the process, with particular emphasis on tasks vulnerable to human fallibility.

Royal Society Open ScienceVol. 11(12)
Eötvös Loránd University (HU), Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Psychology (CZ), Stanford University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Academic integrity and plagiarism
2.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.