摘要：

【目的】 系统分析中国学术论文撤稿时滞的历史规律与学科分布特征,多维度揭示撤稿时滞的影响因素,提出增强期刊净化能力的应对策略。【方法】 在撤稿观察数据库中筛选并获得1992—2024年中国学者学术撤稿共32321篇(含会议论文),采用对比分析及方差分析探讨不同学科领域、出版商、论文类型及撤稿原因下撤稿时滞的差异;采用线性回归方法构建论文发表年份与撤稿时滞间关系模型,分析不同因素影响下撤稿时滞的变化规律。【结果】 中国学者撤稿时滞平均为554 d,中位数为378 d,可划为1992—1999年快速上升、2000—2011年快速下降、2012—2024年缓慢下降3个阶段。不同出版商、学科领域、论文类型及撤稿原因影响下撤稿时滞差异明显;会议论文撤稿是造成2010—2011年间撤稿数量异常高值的主要因素;生物学、生物化学及化学领域撤稿时滞较长。【结论】 建议进一步丰富撤稿时滞内涵,强化举报机制,标准化期刊撤稿流程,完善学术期刊撤稿制度。

关键词: 撤稿时滞, 学科领域, 学术不端, 撤稿原因

Abstract:

[Purposes] To systematically analyze the historical patterns and disciplinary distribution of retraction lag in Chinese academic papers, explore the influencing factors from multiple dimensions, and propose strategies to enhance journal self-purification capabilities. [Methods] A total of 32321 retracted papers (including conference papers) by Chinese scholars from 1992 to 2024 were extracted from the Retraction Watch Database. Comparative and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis were employed to examine differences in retraction lag across disciplines, publishers, paper types, and retraction reasons. Linear regression was used to model the relationship between publication year and retraction lag, analyzing trends under varying factors. [Findings] The average retraction lag for Chinese scholars was 554 days (median: 378 days), divided into three phases: rapid increase (1992—1999), rapid decline (2000—2011), and slow decline (2012—2024). Significant differences in retraction lag were observed across publishers, disciplines, paper types, and retraction reasons. Conference paper retractions drove the abnormal surge in retractions during 2010—2011. Biology, biochemistry, and chemistry exhibited notably longer delays. [Conclusions] Recommendations include refining the conceptual framework of retraction lag, strengthening reporting mechanisms, standardizing journal retraction procedures, and improving institutional design for academic retractions.

Key words: Retraction lag, Disciplinary domains, Academic misconduct, Retraction reasons