IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i12d10.1007_s11192-024-05172-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global retractions due to randomly generated content: Characterization and trends

Author

Listed:
  • Fang Lei

    (Sichuan University)

  • Liang Du

    (Sichuan University
    Sichuan University
    Sichuan University)

  • Min Dong

    (Sichuan University)

  • Xuemei Liu

    (Sichuan University)

Abstract

The aim of the study was to characterize retractions due to randomly generated content. A cross-sectional study was performed, using Retraction Watch database, Journal Citation Reports, Scopus, and journal official websites as data sources. Papers retracted up to 28 May 2024 with reasons related to randomly generated content were included. A total of 3540 retractions were identified. The first retraction was conducted in 2010, and the number of retractions per year escalated from 3 in 2010 to 2302 in 2023. The delay in retraction for papers published between 2020 and 2023 was shorter than that for those published prior to 2020 [2248 (1293, 2687) days vs. 387 (335, 516) days, P

Suggested Citation

  • Fang Lei & Liang Du & Min Dong & Xuemei Liu, 2024. "Global retractions due to randomly generated content: Characterization and trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(12), pages 7943-7958, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05172-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05172-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05172-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-05172-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason Hung & Jackson Chen, 2023. "The Benefits, Risks and Regulation of Using ChatGPT in Chinese Academia: A Content Analysis," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-15, June.
    2. M. D. Ribeiro & S. M. R. Vasconcelos, 2018. "Retractions covered by Retraction Watch in the 2013–2015 period: prevalence for the most productive countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 719-734, February.
    3. M. D. Ribeiro & S. M. R. Vasconcelos, 2018. "Correction to: Retractions covered by Retraction Watch in the 2013–2015 period: prevalence for the most productive countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 735-735, February.
    4. Smriti Mallapaty, 2024. "China conducts first nationwide review of retractions and research misconduct," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(8000), pages 700-701, February.
    5. Richard Van Noorden, 2023. "More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record," Nature, Nature, vol. 624(7992), pages 479-481, December.
    6. Guillaume Cabanac & Cyril Labbé, 2021. "Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(12), pages 1461-1476, December.
    7. Fabián Freijedo-Farinas & Alberto Ruano-Ravina & Mónica Pérez-Ríos & Joseph Ross & Cristina Candal-Pedreira, 2024. "Biomedical retractions due to misconduct in Europe: characterization and trends in the last 20 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(5), pages 2867-2882, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Behzad Gholampour & Sajad Gholampour & Alireza Noruzi & Clément Arsenault & Thomas Haertlé & Ali Akbar Saboury, 2022. "Retracted articles in oncology in the last three decades: frequency, reasons, and themes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1841-1865, April.
    2. Bakthavachalam Elango & Marcin Kozak & Periyaswamy Rajendran, 2019. "Analysis of retractions in Indian science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1081-1094, May.
    3. Howell, Bronwyn E. & Potgieter, Petrus H., 2023. "AI-generated lemons: a sour outlook for content producers?," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277971, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    4. Gonzalo Marco-Cuenca & José Antonio Salvador-Oliván & Rosario Arquero-Avilés, 2021. "Fraud in scientific publications in the European Union. An analysis through their retractions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5143-5164, June.
    5. Lian, Ying & Tang, Huiting & Xiang, Mengting & Dong, Xuefan, 2024. "Public attitudes and sentiments toward ChatGPT in China: A text mining analysis based on social media," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    6. Tariq Ahmad Shah & Sumeer Gul & Saimah Bashir & Suhail Ahmad & Assumpció Huertas & Andrea Oliveira & Farzana Gulzar & Ashaq Hussain Najar & Kanu Chakraborty, 2021. "Influence of accessibility (open and toll-based) of scholarly publications on retractions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4589-4606, June.
    7. Ludovic Jeanne, 2024. "Textual imitations and artificial intelligence : a prospective essay on academic fraud," Post-Print hal-04794323, HAL.
    8. Ali Ghorbi & Mohsen Fazeli-Varzaneh & Erfan Ghaderi-Azad & Marcel Ausloos & Marcin Kozak, 2021. "Retracted papers by Iranian authors: causes, journals, time lags, affiliations, collaborations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7351-7371, September.
    9. Mirela Mezak Matijevic & Barbara Pisker & Kristian Dokic, 2024. "Constructing a Socio-Legal Framework Proposal for Governing Large Language Model Usage and Application in Education," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Ugofilippo Basellini, 2024. "Open science practices in demographic research: An appraisal," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 50(43), pages 1265-1280.
    11. Wenjun Liu & Lei Lei, 2021. "Retractions in the Middle East from 1999 to 2018: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4687-4700, June.

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05172-3. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.