Clarivate to Eliminate Citation Counts for Retracted Articles in Journal Impact Factors: What This Means for Research Integrity

Clarivate has announced a significant change: starting in 2025, citations from retracted papers will no longer be included when calculating journal impact factors. This shift comes amid ongoing debates about whether these citations should count at all.

Currently, retractions are uncommon, making up only 0.04% of articles indexed in Clarivate’s Web of Science. However, the retraction rate has recently increased to about 0.2%. Nandita Quaderi, the editor-in-chief of Web of Science, emphasized that this update aims to prevent misleading distortions in impact factors.

Impact factors measure how often articles from a journal are cited in a given year, compared to the total number of articles published in the previous two years. With the new policy, cases of retraction will still be noted in the total count but will not influence the positive calculation of impact factors. This means journals can still maintain transparency while ensuring integrity.

Bibliometrics expert Reese Richardson raised a valid point: while this decision seems logical, it might lead journals to hesitate on retractions. By retaining retracted papers in the total count, the effect of any retraction on a journal’s reputation could deepen. It raises questions about how many journals would truly see a significant decline in their impact factors.

Despite these changes, Clarivate will keep citations from before a paper’s retraction in mind. They will continue using the Retraction Watch Database to keep track of retracted papers, a practice they adopted in 2022.

Interestingly, this move aligns with past research. In 2011, scholars Arturo Casadevall and Ferric Fang noted that journals with higher impact factors often experienced more retractions. The reasons are still unclear, but it raises questions about how the academic publishing landscape is evolving.

With annual Journal Citation Reports published every June, these changes could reshape how institutions evaluate research quality. Users are reacting, with many expressing hope that this reform will lead to more ethical research practices. It reflects a growing awareness of issues in academic integrity, especially in an age where metrics significantly influence funding and recognition.

In conclusion, while the new policy has its complexities, it is a move toward more responsible academic publishing. The growing push for integrity in research continues to gain momentum as conversations around these changes unfold.

Source link