Article Text
Abstract
The purpose of retracting published papers is to maintain the integrity of academic research. Recent work in research ethics has devoted important attention to how to improve the system of paper retraction. In this context, the focus has primarily been on how to handle fraudulent or flawed research papers and how to encourage the retraction of papers based on honest mistakes. Less attention has been paid to whether papers that report unethical research—for example, research performed without appropriate concern for the moral rights and interests of the research participants—should be retracted. The aim of this paper is to examine to what extent retraction policies of academic journals and publishers address retractions of unethical research and to discuss critically various policy options and the reasons for accepting them. The paper starts by reviewing retraction policies of academic publishers. The results show that many journals do not have explicit policies for how to handle unethical research. Against this background, we then discuss four normative arguments for why unethical research should be retracted. In conclusion, we suggest a retraction policy in light of our empirical and normative investigations.
- research ethics
- publication ethics
- applied and professional ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors WB introduced the theme for the paper and wrote a first version of the text related to the normative analysis. TEG carried out the literature review. TEG and SE conducted the analysis of the empirical data and wrote the first version of the text relating to the procedures and findings of this review. All authors were involved in discussions of the paper and revised the manuscript at several occasions, contributing with new ideas and arguments and other improvements of the manuscript. All authors approved the final version.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Why and how do journals retract articles? An analysis of Medline retractions 1988–2008
- Against the use and publication of contemporary unethical research: the case of Chinese transplant research
- Reasons for and time to retraction of genetics articles published between 1970 and 2018
- Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central
- Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings
- Retractions in the scientific literature: is the incidence of research fraud increasing?
- Retractions in the scientific literature: do authors deliberately commit research fraud?
- Reducing the residue of retractions in evidence synthesis: ways to minimise inappropriate citation and use of retracted data
- Poor visibility of retracted articles: a problem that should no longer be ignored
- Improving biomedical journals’ ethical policies: the case of research misconduct