Keywords
Ethics in science
Sociology of Science
Scientific integrity
Scientific communication
How to Cite
Funding data
-
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
Grant numbers 402602/2023-4
Abstract
Introduction Retraction in scientific publications is a phenomenon that challenges the integrity of science. Despite its importance, the retraction process is often misunderstood, both by researchers and the general public. Objective: This study explores how ethical concepts and sociological theories can broaden the understanding of retraction practices in scientific publications, analyzing the mobilization of these theoretical contributions as interpretative tools that strengthen scientific integrity. Methodology: A critical review of the literature was used, focusing on classic and contemporary texts selected for their theoretical and empirical relevance. The analysis was structured into two main axes: the first investigates ethical approaches through the contributions of philosophers such as Aristotle and Kant, and contemporary theorists of Information Science; the second examines sociological perspectives from authors such as Durkheim, Weber, Merton and Bourdieu, as well as more recent theories such as social constructivism, actor-network theory and social studies in science, technology and society. These approaches elucidate how social and cultural interactions shape current scientific practices, including retraction. Results: It was observed that retractions often occur due to failures in conducting and communicating research, in addition to systemic pressures to publish. These findings are essential to understanding how these causes affect scientific integrity and highlight the need for more rigorous review and editorial management practices. Conclusion: It was found that, when informed by an integrated view of ethical and sociological perspectives, retraction practices not only correct the scientific record, but also strengthen trust in science, underlining the importance of promoting a transparent and accountable scientific environment.
References
ANDRADE, R. C. Kant: a liberdade, o indivíduo e a república. In: WEFFORT, F. (org.). Os clássicos da política. São Paulo, Ática, 1993.
BANERJEE, T.; PARTIN, K.; RESNIK, D. B. Authorship issues when articles are retracted due to research misconduct and then resubmitted. Science and Engineering Ethics, Dordrecht, v. 28, n.4, P.1-25, 2022. DOI: 10.1007/S11948-022-00386-1
BAR-ILAN, J.; HALEVI, G. Retracted articles: the scientific version of fake news. In: GREIFENEDER, R. et al. (ed.). The psychology of fake news: accepting, sharing and correcting misinformation. Oxon: Routledge, 2021. p.47-70.
BELLAH, R. N. Introduction. In: Emile Durkheim on morality and society: selected works. Edited and with an introduction by Robert N. Bellah. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1973.
BLACKBURN, S. Dicionário Oxford de Filosofia. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed., 1997.
BOURDIEU, P. Le champ scientifique. Actes de la Recherche en sciences sociales, Paris, v.2-3, p. 88-104, 1976.
BOURDIEU, P. Science de la science et reflexivité: cours du Collège de France (2000-2001). Paris: Raison d’Agir Éditions, 2001.
BRIGGLE, A.; MITCHAM, C. Ethics and science: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
CALHOUN, C. (Ed.) Robert K. Merton: Sociology of science and sociology as science. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010.
CHEN, C. et al. A visual analytic study of retracted articles in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, New York, v.64, n.2, p.234–253, 2013. DOI: 10.1002/ASI.22755
COPE. Committee on Publication Ethics. Retraction guidelines. 2019. Disponível em: https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines. Acesso em 24 maio 2024.
CROISSANT, J. L. Social theory of science and technology. In: MITCHAM, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of science and technology and Ethics: 4v. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005. p.1816-1820.
CUTCLIFFE, S. H. Science, Technology, and Society Studies. In: MITCHAM, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of science and technology and Ethics: 4v. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005. p.1723-1726.
DURKHEIM, E. Da divisão social do trabalho. Trad. Eduardo Brandão. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1999.
DURKHEIM, E. Cours de science sociale: leçon d'ouverture. Revue international de l'enseignement, v.15, n.1, p. 23-48, 1888. Disponível em: https://l1nq.com/vyPMf. Acesso em 24 maio 2024.
DURRANI, J. Retraction Watch bought by Crossref. Chemistry World, 18 set. 2023. Disponível em: https://l1nq.com/pDoTQ. Acesso em 24 maio 2024.
FERRATER MORA, J. Dicionário de Filosofia: Tomo II (E-J). São Paulo: Loyola, 2001, p. 931-935.
FREUND, J. Sociología de Max Weber. Barcelona: Ediciones Península, 1986.
FROEHLICH, T. J. Ethical concerns of information professionals in an international context. In: ALVAREZ-OSSORIO, J. R.; GOEDGEBUURE, B. G. (ed.). New worlds in information and documentation. Amsterdan: Elsevier; FID, 1994. p. 459-470.
GRANT, M. J.; BOOTH, A. typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, Oxford-UK, v.26, p. 91-108, 2009.
GUIMARÃES, V. A. L.; HAYASHI, M. C. P. I. O ethos e a ciência “pós-acadêmica” na visão de pesquisadores brasileiros. HIb: Revista de Historia Iberoamericana, Madrid, v.9, n.1, p. 28-66, 2016. DOI: 10.3232/RHI.2016.V9.N1.02
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C. O profissional da informação sob o prisma de sua formação. In: VALENTIM, M. L. P. (ed.). Profissionais da informação: formação, perfil e atuação profissional. São Paulo: Polis, 2000. p. 53-70.
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C. et al. Ethics in the knowledge organization environment: an overview of values and problems in the LIS literature. In: ARSENAULT, C.; TENNIS, J. T. (ed.). Culture and identity in knowledge organization. Würzburg: Ergon, 2008. p. 361-366.
GUIMARÃES, J. A. C. Abordagens teóricas de tratamento temático da informação: catalogação de assunto, indexação e análise documental. Ibersid, Zaragoza, v.3, p. 105-117, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54886/ibersid.v3i.3730
HAYASHI, M. C. P. I. Handbooks: base de conhecimento para a compreensão dos estudos sobre ciência, tecnologia, inovação e sociedade. Estudos de Sociologia, Araraquara, v.19, n.37, p. 493-501, 2014. Disponível em: https://encr.pw/6c9Ha. Acesso em 14 mar. 2024.
ICMJE. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Corrections, retractions republications and version control. 2024. Disponível em: https://encr.pw/mvAbm. Acesso em 14 mar. 2024.
JAPIASSU, H.; MARCONDES, D. Dicionário básico de filosofia. 5.ed. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 2008.
KALLEBERG, R. A reconstruction of the ethos of science. Journal of Classical Sociology, New York, v.7, n.2, p. 137-160, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795X07078033
MARTINS, M. H. P. A ética em questão. Palavra-chave, São Paulo, n.8, p. 3-4, out. 1994.
MAX WEBER STUDIES. 2024. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/journal/maxweberstudies Acesso em 24 maio 2024.
MERTON, R. K. Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, New York, v. 1, p. 115-126, 1942.
MERTON, R. K. The normative structure of science. In: MERTON. R. K. The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. Ed. an introduction by Norman W. Storer. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1973. p.267-278.
MITCHAM. C. Co-responsability for research integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics, Dordrecht, v.9, p. 273-290, 2003. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-003-0014-0
MULKAY, M. Interpretation and the use of rules: the case of the norms of science. In: GIERYN. T. (ed.). Science and social structure: a festschrift for Robert K. Merton. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences, 1980. p. 111-125.
REIS, V. M. S. O problema do ethos científico no novo modo de produção da ciência contemporânea. Tese (Doutorado em Filosofia). Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, 2010.
SÁNCHEZ VÁZQUEZ, A. Ética. Trad. João Dell’Anna. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1975.
SANTOS-D’AMORIM, K. et al Razões e implicações de artigos retratados no Brasil. Transinformação, Campinas, v.33, e210001. 2021. DOI: 10.1590/2318-0889202133e210001
SANTOS-D’AMORIM, K. et al. Retratados e ainda citados: perfil de citações pós-retratação em artigos de pesquisadores brasileiros. Em Questão, Porto Alegre, v.29, e125494, 2023. DOI: 10.19132/1808-5245.29.125494
SEVERINO, A. J. Filosofia. São Paulo: Cortês, 1994.
SHUAI, X. et al. A multidimensional investigation of the effects of publication retraction on scholarly impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, New York, v.68, n. 9, p. 2225-2236, 2017. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23826
SICA, A. Durkheim, Émile. In: MITCHAM, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of science, technology and ethics. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005a. v. 1-4, p.551-552.
SICA, A. Weber, Max. In: MITCHAM, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of science, technology and ethics. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005b. v. 1-4, p.2057-2059.
SICA, A. Introduction: Max Weber today. In: SICA, Alan. (Ed.) The Routledge International Handbook on Max Weber. Oxon: Routledge, 2023. p. 1-20.
SILVA, A. P. da. Códigos de ética do profissional arquivista: contribuições da crítica diplomática para a caracterização de uma espécie documental. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência da Informação). Marília: UNESP, 2021.
SIROUX, D. Deontologia. In: CANTO-SPERBER, M. (org.). Dicionário de ética e filosofia moral. São Leopoldo: Ed. Unisinos, v.1, p.405-406, 2007.
SOUZA, F. das C. de. Ética e deontologia: textos para profissionais atuantes em bibliotecas. Florianópolis: Ed. da UFSC; Itajaí: Ed. da UNIVALI, 2002.
SROUR, R. H. Poder, cultura e ética nas organizações. Rio de Janeiro: Campus,1998.
STOERGER, S. Sociological ethics. In: MITCHAM, C. (ed.). Encyclopedia of science, technology and ethics. Farmington Hills: Thomson Gale, 2005. v. 1-4, p.1823-1827.
SZTOMPKA, P. Trust in science. Journal of Classical Sociology, New York, v. 7, n.2, p. 211-220. DOI: 10.1177/1468795X07078038
TURNER, S. (ed.). Emile Durkheim: sociologist and moralist. London: Routledge, 1993.
WAKEFIELD, A. et al. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet, London, v.351, p. 637-641, 1998.
WECKERT, J.; ADENEY, D. Ética informática y las ciencias de la información. Madrid: Fragua, 2000.
WEBER, M. A política como vocação. In: WEBER, M. Ensaios de sociologia. Org. e introd. de H. H. Gerth, C. Wright Mills. 5.ed. Rio de Janeiro. LTC, 1999. p.97-153.
WEBER, M. A ciência como vocação. In: WEBER, Max. Ensaios de sociologia. Org. e introd. de H. H. Gerth, C. Wright Mills. 5.ed. Rio de Janeiro. LTC, 1999. p.154-183.
WEBER, M. A ética protestante e o “espírito” do capitalismo. Rev. e ed. de Antonio Flavio Pierucci. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2004.
WEISS, R. Max Weber e o problema dos valores: as justificativas para a neutralidade axiológica. Revista de Sociologia e Política, Curitiba, v.22, n.49, p. 113-137, 2014. DOI: 10.1590/S0104-44782014000100007
ZHAKSYLYK, A. et al. Research integrity: where we are and where we are heading. Journal of Korean Medical Science, Seoul, v. 38, n.4, e405, 2023. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e405
ZIMAN, J. M. Getting scientists to think about what they are doing. Science and Engineering Ethics, Dordrecht, v.7, n.2, p. 165-176, 2001. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-001-0038-2
ZIMAN, J. M. Real science: what it is and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
ZUCKERMAN, H. Scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the United States. New York: Free Press, 1977a.
ZUCKERMAN, H. Deviant behavior and social control in science. In: SAGARIN, E. (ed.). Deviance and social change: Sage Annual Reviews of Studies in Deviance, v 1. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1977b. p. 87-138.
ZUCKERMAN, H. Is “the time ripe” for quantitative research on misconduct in science? Quantitative Studies of Science, Cambridge, v.1, n.3, p. 945-958, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00065
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Maria Cristina Piumbato Innocentini Hayashi, José Augusto Chaves Guimarães
Downloads
