Costly collaborations: The impact of scientific fraud on co-authors' careers

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 67, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 535-542

  Mongeon, Philippe ^a   Larivière, Vincent ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

author productivity; bibliometrics; ethics

Indexed keywords

PRODUCTIVITY;

BIBLIOMETRICS; BIOMEDICAL FIELDS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ETHICS; SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; WEB OF SCIENCE;

CRIME;

BIBLIOMETRICS; CAREER; ETHICS; FRAUD; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MISCONDUCT; PRODUCTIVITY; WEB OF SCIENCE;

EID: 84997831530     PISSN: 23301635     EISSN: 23301643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.23421     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Azoulay, P., Furman, J.L., Krieger, J.L., & Murray, F.E. (2012). Retractions. NBER Working Paper Series, 18449.
2. Birnholtz, J.P. (2006). What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(13), 1758–1770.
3. Bonetta, L. (2006). The aftermath of scientific fraud. Cell, 124(5), 873–875.
4. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J.G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood.
5. Cokol, M., Ozbay, F., & Rodriguez-Esteban, R. (2008). Retraction rates are on the rise. EMBO Reports, 9(1), 2.
6. Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738.
7. Fang, F.C., Steen, R.G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(42), 17028–17033.
8. Furman, J.L., Jensen, K., & Murray, F. (2012). Governing knowledge in the scientific community: Exploring the role of retractions in biomedicine. Research Policy, 41(2), 276–290.
9. Jin, G.Z., Jones, B., Lu, S.F., & Uzzi, B. (2013). The reverse Matthew effect: Catastrophe and consequence in scientific teams. NBER Working Paper Series, 19489.
10. Lu, S.F., Jin, G.Z., Uzzi, B., & Jones, B. (2013). The retraction penalty: Evidence from the Web of science. Scientific Reports, 3(3146).
11. Merton, R.K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.
12. Nath, S.B., Marcus, S.C., & Druss, B.G. (2006). Retractions in the research literature: Misconduct or mistakes? The Medical Journal of Australia, 185(3), 152–154.
13. Neale, A.V., Northrup, J., Dailey, R.K., Marks, E., & Abrams, J. (2007). Correction and use of biomedical literature affected by scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(1), 5–24.
14. Neale, A.V., Dailey, R.K., & Abrams, J. (2010). Analysis of citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(2), 251–261.
15. Pfeifer, M.P., & Snodgrass, G. (1990). The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), 1420–1423.
16. Pontille, D. (2004). La signature scientifique: une sociologie pragmatique de l'attribution. Paris, France: CNRS.
17. Reich, E.S. (2009). Plastic fantastic: How the biggest fraud in physics shook the scientific world. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Seven Days: 26 April–2 May 2013. (2013). Nature news. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/news/seven-days-26-april-2-may-2013-1.12899#/trend
19. Sovacool, B.K. (2008). Exploring scientific misconduct: Isolated individuals, impure institutions, or an inevitable idiom of modern science? Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 5(4), 271–282.
20. Steen, R.G. (2011). Retractions in the scientific literature: Is the incidence of research fraud increasing? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(4), 249–253.
21. Steen, R.G. (2012). Retractions in the medical literature: How can patients be protected from risk? Journal of Medical Ethics, 38(4), 228–232.
22. Steen, R.G., Casadevall, A., & Fang, F.C. (2013). Why has the number of scientific retractions increased? PLoS ONE, 8(7), e68397.
23. Steneck, N. (2006). Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 53–74.
24. Wuchty, S., Jones, B., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.
25. Zhang, M., & Grieneisen, M. (2012). The impact of misconduct on the published medical and non-medical literature, and the news media. Scientometrics, 96(2), 1–15.