東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

A citation context analysis of retra...

Wright, Nancy Daniel.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles./
作者:	Wright, Nancy Daniel.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 1991,
面頁冊數:	493 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 52-06, Section: A, page: 1930.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International52-06A.
標題:	Library science. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9133185

A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles.
Wright, Nancy Daniel.

A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 1991 - 493 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 52-06, Section: A, page: 1930.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 1991.

When scientific articles are found to contain fabricated or plagiarized data, or to be invalidated by pervasive error, they are customarily withdrawn from the literature by published retractions. The effect of retraction was studied by citation analysis of 53 retracted biomedical articles. Two research questions were investigated: Does publication of a retraction depress the frequency of subsequent citation? and Are post-retraction citations negative, or are retracted papers cited in order to support or substantiate the assumptions or findings of the citing article? The first question was studied by comparing the number of citations that each article received during the two years before retraction to the number of citations received during the two years following retraction. A statistically significant difference was found between the number of pre-retraction citations (495) and the number of post-retraction citations (303). The difference remained statistically significant even after estimating the decline in citation frequency attributable to obsolescence. The second question was studied by citation context analysis of the 303 residual articles that had cited the retracted publications. The portions of the citing articles that referenced the retracted articles were classified by a subject specialist according to the typology of citation contexts developed by Chubin and Moitra. Citation contexts were found to be affirmative to a statistically significant extent. With ninety percent of the citations being affirmative, the retracted articles were cited as though they were still valid. The citing articles, whose authors were evidently unaware of the published retractions, were written in standard scientific languages; generally originated in the United States, Western Europe, or Scandinavia; and were published in relatively prestigious journals. A content analysis of retraction statements indicated that only 68 percent specified the reason for retraction, 45 percent were published prominently in the journal, and 40 percent identified the individual responsible for the error or misconduct. The continued, affirmative use of retracted articles suggests that some retractions are going unheeded, and that invalid information may be perpetuated through citation in subsequent articles.Subjects--Topical Terms:

539284
Library science.

A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles.
LDR:03197nmm a2200277 4500 001 2120554
005 20170719065534.5
008 180830s1991 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI9133185
035 $a AAI9133185
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Wright, Nancy Daniel. $3 3282494
245 1 2 $a A citation context analysis of retracted scientific articles.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 1991
300 $a 493 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 52-06, Section: A, page: 1930.
500 $a Director: Jerry S. Kidd.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 1991.
520 $a When scientific articles are found to contain fabricated or plagiarized data, or to be invalidated by pervasive error, they are customarily withdrawn from the literature by published retractions. The effect of retraction was studied by citation analysis of 53 retracted biomedical articles. Two research questions were investigated: Does publication of a retraction depress the frequency of subsequent citation? and Are post-retraction citations negative, or are retracted papers cited in order to support or substantiate the assumptions or findings of the citing article? The first question was studied by comparing the number of citations that each article received during the two years before retraction to the number of citations received during the two years following retraction. A statistically significant difference was found between the number of pre-retraction citations (495) and the number of post-retraction citations (303). The difference remained statistically significant even after estimating the decline in citation frequency attributable to obsolescence. The second question was studied by citation context analysis of the 303 residual articles that had cited the retracted publications. The portions of the citing articles that referenced the retracted articles were classified by a subject specialist according to the typology of citation contexts developed by Chubin and Moitra. Citation contexts were found to be affirmative to a statistically significant extent. With ninety percent of the citations being affirmative, the retracted articles were cited as though they were still valid. The citing articles, whose authors were evidently unaware of the published retractions, were written in standard scientific languages; generally originated in the United States, Western Europe, or Scandinavia; and were published in relatively prestigious journals. A content analysis of retraction statements indicated that only 68 percent specified the reason for retraction, 45 percent were published prominently in the journal, and 40 percent identified the individual responsible for the error or misconduct. The continued, affirmative use of retracted articles suggests that some retractions are going unheeded, and that invalid information may be perpetuated through citation in subsequent articles.
590 $a School code: 0117.
650 4 $a Library science. $3 539284
650 4 $a Information science. $3 554358
690 $a 0399
690 $a 0723
710 2 $a University of Maryland, College Park. $3 657686
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 52-06A.
790 $a 0117
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 1991
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9133185