Retracted Science and the Retraction Index¶
Fang, F. C., & Casadevall, A. (2011). Retracted Science and the Retraction Index. Infection and Immunity, 3855-3859.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Validity-ending Event
- The propagation channel is the citation-and-indexing ecosystem, and the separation invariant exposes the field's characteristic failure: the gap between the retraction's effective date and the moment downstream consumers learn of it is large and poorly instrumented, so citations to the retracted work continue to accumulate for years — the stale-evidence pathology operating at the scale of a literature, where authors cite an invalidated result because the invalidation never propagated to them.
This sourceContinued citation of retracted papers — stale-evidence propagation operating at the scale of a literature.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Fang and Casadevall note retracted papers keep being cited, sometimes for decades, but do not analyse the citation-indexing channel or why notice fails to propagate.
“Moreover, it is disheartening that retracted articles continue to be cited, sometimes for decades afterward”
- The propagation channel is the citation-and-indexing ecosystem, and the separation invariant exposes the field's characteristic failure: the gap between the retraction's effective date and the moment downstream consumers learn of it is large and poorly instrumented, so citations to the retracted work continue to accumulate for years — the stale-evidence pathology operating at the scale of a literature, where authors cite an invalidated result because the invalidation never propagated to them.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:d8d09bdb0c54 · see in the full table