| Title |
Plagiarism Allegations Account for Most Retractions in Major Latin American/Caribbean Databases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-015-9714-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renan Moritz V. R. Almeida, Karina de Albuquerque Rocha, Fernanda Catelani, Aldo José Fontes-Pereira, Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos |
| Abstract |
This study focuses on retraction notices from two major Latin American/Caribbean indexing databases: SciELO and LILACS. SciELO includes open scientific journals published mostly in Latin America/the Caribbean, from which 10 % are also indexed by Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge Journal of Citation Reports (JCR). LILACS has a similar geographical coverage and includes dissertations and conference/symposia proceedings, but it is limited to publications in the health sciences. A search for retraction notices was performed in these two databases using the keywords "retracted", "retraction" "withdrawal", "withdrawn", "removed" and "redress". Documents were manually checked to identify those that actually referred to retractions, which were then analyzed and categorized according to the reasons alleged in the notices. Dates of publication/retraction and time to retraction were also recorded. Searching procedures were performed between June and December 2014. Thirty-one retraction notices were identified, fifteen of which were in JCR-indexed journals. "Plagiarism" was alleged in six retractions of this group. Among the non-JCR journals, retraction reasons were alleged in fourteen cases, twelve of which were attributed to "plagiarism". The proportion of retracted articles for the SciELO database was approximately 0.005 %. The reasons alleged in retraction notices may be used as signposts to inform discussions in Latin America on plagiarism and research integrity. At the international level, these results suggest that the correction of the literature is becoming global and is not limited to mainstream international publications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 67% |
| Mexico | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Librarian | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 24% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 8 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 9% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,113,811
of 24,221,802 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#176
of 951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,831
of 289,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,221,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.