IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v13y2025i3p41-d1742343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reckoning with Retractions in Research Funding Reviews: The Case of China

Author

Listed:
  • Shaoxiong Brian Xu

    (School of Foreign Studies, Huanggang Normal University, Huanggang 438000, China
    Department of English and Communication, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Guangwei Hu

    (Department of English and Communication, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China)

Abstract

China’s retraction crisis has raised concerns about research integrity and accountability within its scientific community and beyond. To address this issue, we proposed in an earlier publication that Chinese research funders incorporate retraction records into the evaluation of research funding applications by establishing a retraction-based review system. This review system would debar researchers with retraction records from applying for funding for a specified period. However, our earlier proposal lacked practical guidance on how to operationalize such a review system. In this article, we expand on our proposal by fleshing out the proposed ten debarment determinants and offering a framework for quantifying the duration of funding ineligibility. Additionally, we outline the critical steps for implementing the retraction-based review system, address the major challenges to its effective and sustainable adoption, and propose viable solutions to these challenges. Finally, we discuss the benefits of implementing the review system, emphasizing its potential to strengthen research integrity and foster a culture of accountability in the Chinese academic community.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaoxiong Brian Xu & Guangwei Hu, 2025. "Reckoning with Retractions in Research Funding Reviews: The Case of China," Publications, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-28, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:13:y:2025:i:3:p:41-:d:1742343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/13/3/41/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/13/3/41/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:13:y:2025:i:3:p:41-:d:1742343. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.