Table 1.
Correlations among journal impact factor (IF) and time-to-retraction expressed in months for different infractions.
Figure 1.
Papers published and retracted per year since 1973.
Note that the multipliers are different. For the sake of simplicity, error here includes all infractions except fraud (e.g., scientific error, plagiarism, duplication, other). Apparent declines in recent years must be interpreted with caution as additional papers may be retracted in the future, thereby reversing this decline.
Figure 2.
Months to retract by year of publication and by year of retraction.
The fitted lines are 3-year moving averages of the plotted points. Apparent declines in recent years must be interpreted with caution as additional papers may be retracted in the future, thereby reversing this decline.
Figure 3.
Retractions by authors with varying numbers of retractions, plotted by year.
Apparent declines in recent years must be interpreted with caution as additional papers may be retracted in the future, thereby reversing this decline.
Figure 4.
Impact of authors with >5 retracted articles, plotted by year.
Apparent declines in recent years must be interpreted with caution as additional papers may be retracted in the future, thereby reversing this decline.
Figure 5.
Cumulative probability of a retractable paper being retracted, together with the number of papers retracted per month.
Figure 6.
Articles retracted as a function of year of publication, shown with model predictions of the number of papers likely to be retracted.
Apparent declines in recent years must be interpreted with caution as additional papers may be retracted in the future, thereby reversing this decline.