TY - JOUR
T1 - An extended state of uncertainty
T2 - A snap-shot of expressions of concern in neuroscience
AU - Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A.
AU - Yamada, Yuki
N1 - Funding Information:
JTS has written about, and been written about, Retraction Watch, whose retraction database was used in this study. Although this study and project was not funded, YY was funded by JSPS KAKENHI (16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015, and 20H04581). JTS is not funded. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest of relevance to this topic.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors
PY - 2021/11
Y1 - 2021/11
N2 - An expression of concern (EoC) alerts readers to new considerations or concerns about a paper, usually at the post-publication stage. Authors and readers are left in a state of uncertainty as they await a resolution. This uncertainty might create a state of stress or anxiety for some authors. The paper's findings may be either validated and confirmed, resolving the EoC, or the paper's validity or loss of integrity is confirmed, leading to an erratum or retraction. Academics wanting to cite a paper to which an EoC is associated might decide not to cite it. If an EoC is reversed, i.e., if the post-publication findings annul the initial concerns, then the authors and journal may suffer a “loss” of citations. Conversely, if concerns are confirmed post-publication, and the EoC develops into a retraction, then any citations that were rewarded while the paper was in a state of uncertainty were rewarded unfairly. In such a case, both author- and journal-based metrics should be adjusted. Using the Retraction Watch database until April 20, 2021, we assessed 20 cases of EoCs in the neuroscience literature to appreciate how EoCs have been processed. After excluding one author-issued EoC, from 19 editor-issued EoCs, 10 were resolved in an average of 220 days while nine remain unresolved. In this article, we suggest the need to make the processes associated with an EoC more visible and transparent to the academic community, allowing editors to make the correct decisions regarding its resolution.
AB - An expression of concern (EoC) alerts readers to new considerations or concerns about a paper, usually at the post-publication stage. Authors and readers are left in a state of uncertainty as they await a resolution. This uncertainty might create a state of stress or anxiety for some authors. The paper's findings may be either validated and confirmed, resolving the EoC, or the paper's validity or loss of integrity is confirmed, leading to an erratum or retraction. Academics wanting to cite a paper to which an EoC is associated might decide not to cite it. If an EoC is reversed, i.e., if the post-publication findings annul the initial concerns, then the authors and journal may suffer a “loss” of citations. Conversely, if concerns are confirmed post-publication, and the EoC develops into a retraction, then any citations that were rewarded while the paper was in a state of uncertainty were rewarded unfairly. In such a case, both author- and journal-based metrics should be adjusted. Using the Retraction Watch database until April 20, 2021, we assessed 20 cases of EoCs in the neuroscience literature to appreciate how EoCs have been processed. After excluding one author-issued EoC, from 19 editor-issued EoCs, 10 were resolved in an average of 220 days while nine remain unresolved. In this article, we suggest the need to make the processes associated with an EoC more visible and transparent to the academic community, allowing editors to make the correct decisions regarding its resolution.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126713560&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85126713560&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100045
DO - 10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100045
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85126713560
VL - 2
JO - Current Research in Behavioral Sciences
JF - Current Research in Behavioral Sciences
SN - 2666-5182
M1 - 100045
ER -