|
on Sociology of Economics |
| By: | Valérie Mignon; Marc Joëts |
| Abstract: | This article examines the persistent impact of zombie papers, i.e., retracted or destined-for-retraction publications that continue to influence academic discourse through ongoing citations despite their discredited status. Relying on a large sample of 25, 480 retracted research articles over the 1923-2023 period, we introduce a novel methodological framework combining survival analysis with the innovative Zombie Population Decay Dynamics (ZPDD) model, a theoretical approach designed to simulate the long-term persistence and decay of zombie papers under various editorial interventions. We identify key factors affecting retraction timing and zombie papers' persistence. Serious misconduct, such as data fabrication, significantly delays retractions, while geographic disparities exacerbate inefficiencies, with certain regions facing prolonged processes. Journal practices, such as open-access versus subscription-based models, also influence retraction dynamics, with subscription-based journals exhibiting faster corrective actions. Developing a mathematical optimization framework derived from our ZPDD model, we determine the most effective mix of editorial policies while balancing practical feasibility and intervention intensity. The findings highlight data transparency as the most impactful intervention for reducing zombie papers' persistence, followed by enhanced plagiarism detection and reproducibility measures, such as pre-registration and replication studies. Overall, a well-balanced combination of targeted editorial interventions can substantially accelerate retraction processes and limit the detrimental influence of zombie papers on academic discourse. |
| Keywords: | scientific retraction, zombie papers, survival analysis, accelerated failure time model, editorial policies |
| JEL: | C18 C80 Z0 |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:drm:wpaper:2025-7 |
| By: | Rossello, Giulia; Martinelli, Arianna |
| Abstract: | This paper bridges the organisational psychology and the economics of science literature to examine the role of ideology-based psychological contract breach in eliciting mild deviant behaviour in academia. We provide empirical evidence of how the deterioration of academic values related to the diffusion of the “publish or perish” paradigm sparkles copyright violations through Sci-Hub. Based on a representative sample of 2849 academics working in top institutions in 6 European countries, we find that ideology-based psychological contract breach explains Sci-Hub usage, also when controlling for other trivial motivations. The magnitude of the effect depends on contextual and demographic characteristics. Females, foreign and tenured scholars are less likely to respond with digital piracy when experiencing a contract breach of academic values. Our results contribute to prevention policy design, highlighting how policies restoring academic values might also address academic piracy. |
| JEL: | D23 L86 O34 |
| Date: | 2023–03–31 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:unm:unumer:2023009 |
| By: | Cowan, Robin (RS: GSBE other - not theme-related research, Mt Economic Research Inst on Innov/Techn); Jonard, Nicolas |
| Abstract: | Among the many changes that have affected academic life in recent decades we draw attention to two: increasing collaboration in the production of knowledge, and the rising prominence of (automated) “rankings” in evaluation of individuals and institutions. In this paper we build a model to address the effect of the latter in the presence of the former. Scientists collaborate to create new knowledge. Intra-department collaborations dominate, but cross-department knowledge flows are present in two forms: collegial links outside a department, and a job market whereby scientists can change departments. Rankings enter the model through the job market: they are parametrized to control the extent to which they are used to evaluate job candidates on the one side, and job openings on the other side of the market. We find that when rankings are aggressively pursued aggregate knowledge output is lower, and further, knowledge production at both individual and department levels is more stratified or segregated. These effects can be mitigated by encouraging extra-department collaboration, but we observe that this strategy will erode the coherence (and purpose) of the department structures in which universities are currently organized. |
| JEL: | D83 O31 O32 |
| Date: | 2024–11–19 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:unm:unumer:2024031 |