Chinese universities are nearing the deadline to complete a comprehensive audit of retracted research papers and investigate cases of research misconduct. According to a notice from the Ministry of Education’s Department of Science, Technology, and Informatization, universities must submit a detailed list of academic articles retracted from both English and Chinese-language journals over the past three years by February 15.
This nationwide self-review was prompted by the retraction of a significant number of papers by Chinese authors, particularly by Hindawi, a London-based subsidiary of Wiley. The government expressed concern that these retractions, along with others from various publishers, have had a detrimental effect on China’s academic reputation and environment.
A Nature analysis reveals that Chinese co-authors were involved in a substantial portion of retractions, with more than 9,600 retractions issued by Hindawi last year, of which about 8,200 had Chinese co-authors. Overall, nearly 14,000 retraction notices, three-quarters of which involved Chinese co-authors, were issued by all publishers in 2023.
This initiative marks the first nationwide effort to investigate retractions and research misconduct in China. While previous investigations were conducted on a case-by-case basis, this time, all institutions must carry out their investigations simultaneously.
Despite a tight deadline and disruptions caused by the academic winter break, universities are expected to submit their findings on time. Researchers with retracted papers must explain the reasons behind the retractions, distinguishing between misconduct and honest mistakes. Universities are then tasked with investigating and penalizing misconduct. Failure to declare retracted papers can result in punishment.
The notice places responsibility on the first corresponding author of a paper to submit a response, addressing concerns about researchers shirking responsibility for collaborative work. It emphasizes due process, allowing researchers accused of misconduct to appeal during the investigation.
While it remains unclear how the ministry will utilize the submitted information, some suggest that publicizing collated lists of retractions and reasons for retraction could be beneficial. Others hope for annual reviews to maintain pressure on authors and universities to uphold research integrity.
Regardless of the ministry’s actions, the reporting process itself is expected to deter misconduct, particularly in English-language journals where retractions are more common compared to Chinese-language journals.
This information has been extracted from: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00397-x
