2022
A quantitative and qualitative open citation analysis of retracted articles in the humanities
Abstract: In this article, we show and discuss the results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of open citations to retracted publications in the humanities domain. Our study was conducted by selecting retracted papers in the humanities domain and marking their main characteristics (e.g., retraction reason). Then, we gathered the citing entities and annotated their basic metadata (e.g., title, venue, etc.) and the characteristics of their in-text citations (e.g., intent, sentiment, etc.). Using these data, we per…
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
17
1
0
0
Citation Types
0
5
0
0
Year Published
2022
2026
Publication Types
Select...
13
3
1
1
Relationship
0
18
Authors
Journals
Cited by 16 publications
(5 citation statements)
References 54 publications
0
5
0
0
“…Such myths have been demonstrated to arise and proliferate by quotation error (Wetterer, 2006) and subsist even despite citing authors also citing the refuting publications in the same article, a phenomenon that Letrud & Hernes (2019) call affirmative citation bias. In a similar vein, studies on retractions find consistently that retracted articles continue to be cited after retraction without change and that the retraction is very rarely acknowledged (Heibi & Peroni, 2022;Hsiao & Schneider, 2021). In both cases, it seems probable that the cited studies have not actually been read and understood.…”
Section: Derek De Solla Price Wrote In Little Science Big Sciencementioning
confidence: 91%
“…Such myths have been demonstrated to arise and proliferate by quotation error (Wetterer, 2006) and subsist even despite citing authors also citing the refuting publications in the same article, a phenomenon that Letrud & Hernes (2019) call affirmative citation bias. In a similar vein, studies on retractions find consistently that retracted articles continue to be cited after retraction without change and that the retraction is very rarely acknowledged (Heibi & Peroni, 2022;Hsiao & Schneider, 2021). In both cases, it seems probable that the cited studies have not actually been read and understood.…”
Section: Derek De Solla Price Wrote In Little Science Big Sciencementioning
confidence: 91%
“…However, it is clear from the reported studies that the reasons for retraction are different in the humanities than in the medical and natural sciences. Fabrication of data is much less common, and the dominant reasons for contractions are plagiarism and duplicate publication (Halevi, 2020; Heibi & Peroni, 2022). However, the pattern of citations of retracted articles is very similar to that in biomedicine.…”
Section: Retractions In the Humanitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No indication of a post‐retraction decline in the number of citations could be found. The vast majority of post‐retraction citations were positive, and only 2.25% of them mentioned the retraction (Heibi & Peroni, 2022).…”
Section: Retractions In the Humanitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quantitative analysis refers to the in-depth analysis of public opinion events through quantitative means, including the measurement of indicators such as event scale, dissemination speed, social media influence, as well as the statistics and data analysis of event related information. By quantitatively analyzing and quantifying the impact of an event, it is possible to better understand the severity of the event and propose corresponding strategies [19][20].…”
Section: Qualitative Prediction and Quantitative Analysis Of Educatio...mentioning
confidence: 99%
