On the Dearth of Retractions in Social Work: A Cross-Sectional Study of Ten Leading Journals

In recent decades, there has been an increase in the number of retractions across the biomedical and social sciences. A high rate of retractions undermines the integrity of scholarly journals and threatens the credibility of scientific disciplines. It is unknown how common retractions are within the field of social work. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of retractions among ten leading social work journals. This cross-sectional study employed three search strategies. First, each journal’s website was searched using the keywords “retracted” and “retraction”. The same procedure was employed, for each journal, using Google Scholar’s advanced search function. Finally, the Retraction Watch Database was queried using the name of each journal. None of the 196 results produced from these search strategies resulted in the identification of a single retracted article. Reasons for this absence are explored and recommendations to enhance the integrity of social work research and journals are discussed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Metrics
Published
2025-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/metrics2030016
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

On the Dearth of Retractions in Social Work: A Cross-Sectional Study of Ten Leading Journals

Daniel J. Dunleavy
1 citations
Metrics
Ethics in Clinical Research
1.88
article

On the Dearth of Retractions in Social Work: A Cross-Sectional Study of Ten Leading Journals

Daniel J. Dunleavy
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In recent decades, there has been an increase in the number of retractions across the biomedical and social sciences. A high rate of retractions undermines the integrity of scholarly journals and threatens the credibility of scientific disciplines. It is unknown how common retractions are within the field of social work. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of retractions among ten leading social work journals. This cross-sectional study employed three search strategies. First, each journal’s website was searched using the keywords “retracted” and “retraction”. The same procedure was employed, for each journal, using Google Scholar’s advanced search function. Finally, the Retraction Watch Database was queried using the name of each journal. None of the 196 results produced from these search strategies resulted in the identification of a single retracted article. Reasons for this absence are explored and recommendations to enhance the integrity of social work research and journals are discussed.

MetricsVol. 2(3)
Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Ethics in Clinical Research
1.88
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.