Mapping Academic Integrity: Global Retraction Trends Explored through a Topic Lens
Abstract
Scientific publications have long served as the cornerstone of innovation, exhibiting stable growth over the years. Recently, however, retractions have surged dramatically, driven largely by the proliferation of low-quality and fraudulent articles, posing a substantial threat to research integrity. By integrating annual publication and retraction data, this study employs the relative retraction rate (R3) to systematically examine disparities and evolving trends from a topical perspective. Our analysis reveals that the number of retractions has grown significantly faster than that of global publications, yielding an overall retraction rate of 0.12%. While retractions occur across all disciplines, substantial disparities exist, ranging from 0.035% in Physics to 0.34% in Computer Science. This gap widens at finer levels of granularity, reaching roughly 8.99% in Human-Computer Interaction. Moreover, unusually high R3 values frequently coincide with rapid publication growth in specific fields. We also developed Retraction Monitor, a web application for monitoring retraction dynamics across diverse fields, enabling stakeholders to visualize these trends and assess risks to research integrity. These findings provide valuable insights for identifying high-risk fields and developing tailored governance policies to strengthen research rigor and mitigate field-specific retraction risks.
Turn this paper into a full lesson
ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.