| 王晨阳.《科学计量学》不当撤稿事件剖析与启示.编辑学报,2025,37(5):580-584 |
| 《科学计量学》不当撤稿事件剖析与启示 |
| Analysis and enlightenment of the improper retraction incident in Scientometrics |
| |
| DOI：10.16811/j.cnki.1001-4314.2025.05.022 |
| 中文关键词: 撤稿机制 学术出版伦理 利益冲突 作者权益 学术自由 《科学计量学》 |
| 英文关键词: retraction mechanism academic publishing ethics conflict of interest authors’ rights academic freedom Scientometrics |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 935 |
| 全文下载次数: 542 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 撤稿是维护科学记录完整性的重要机制,但不当撤稿事件时有发生。本文以《科学计量学》不当撤稿事件为例,剖析了事件过程:作者发表关于掠夺性出版的论文后,因涉及某开放获取出版商利益遭投诉,编辑未充分调查便撤稿,国际出版伦理委员会(COPE)审查也存在缺陷。事件暴露了COPE调查能力不足、存在利益冲突,期刊出版商撤稿机制缺陷、编辑行为失范,以及学术出版系统作者权益保护薄弱、威胁学术自由等问题。对此,提出COPE应加强调查能力、解决利益冲突、完善指南,期刊出版商健全撤稿机制、规范编辑行为,学术出版系统强化作者权益保护、捍卫学术自由等改进方向与措施,以完善撤稿机制,保障学术出版的诚信与质量。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Retraction serves as a crucial safeguard for preserving the integrity of scientific literature; however, instances of improper retraction do occur. Using an improper retraction incident in Scientometrics journal as a case study, this paper examines the incident trajectory:following publication of a paper addressing predatory publishing practices, the authors faced complaints due to perceived conflicts with an open-access publisher’s interests. The editors proceeded with retraction without thorough investigation, while the subsequent Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) review also exhibited procedural deficiencies. This incident revealed systemic vulnerabilities including:inadequate investigative capacity and unresolved conflicts of interest within the COPE; flaws in journal publishers’ retraction protocols and editorial misconduct; insufficient safeguarding of authors’ rights within academic publishing systems; and threats to academic freedom. In response, this study proposes targeted recommendations:COPE should enhance investigative expertise, address organizational conflicts of interest, and refine operational guidelines; journal publishers ought to strengthen retraction mechanisms and regulate editorial conduct; and academic publishing systems must reinforce author rights protection while upholding academic freedom principles. These measures aim to optimize retraction protocols and ensure the credibility and quality of academic publishing. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
|
|
