Should corrections of the literature influence grant review?

Abstract

The effect of retractions on the career of scientists is an emerging issue and can be assessed, for example, through citation patterns for articles by authors with retractions. Other possible influences are not well known, but they are worth investigating in a time of changing perceptions of impact and of which factors should influence the reward systems of science. Although academia has cultivated a "culture of impact" in science, rigor and the reliability of the research record seem to be gradually taking a stronger role in today's scientific zeitgeist, as suggested in a recent Nature commentary (Casadevall, 2019). However, the extent to which this shifting panorama may influence, for example, grant review criteria is an open question. As part of an ongoing project, we present results of a qualitative pilot study with a group of funders/review panel members who shared their views on the possible role of retractions and of self-correcting the literature in funding decisions. Their comments reflect the difficulty of dealing with retractions in the review of applications for funding. However, they also lend credence to the idea that a broader look at the impact of correction of the literature on research assessment is warranted in this time of changing notions of rewards in science.

Ähnliche Arbeiten