Retracted Papers Die Hard, see the Diederik Stapel case and the Enduring Influence of Flawed Science: Stapel’s papers are still cited in a favorable way within and outside the psychological literature

Moris Fernandez, Luis, and Miguel A. Vadillo. 2019. “Retracted Papers Die Hard: Diederik Stapel and the Enduring Influence of Flawed Science.” PsyArXiv. June 19. doi:10.31234/osf.io/cszpy

Abstract: Self-correction is a defining feature of science. However, science’s ability to correct itself is far from optimal as shown, for instance, by the persistent influence of papers that have been retracted due to faulty methods or research misconduct. In this study, we track citations to the retracted work of Diederik Stapel. These citations provide a powerful indicative of the enduring influence of flawed science, as the (admittedly fabricated) data reported in these retracted papers provide no evidence for or against any hypothesis and this case of fraud was widely known due to the extensive media coverage of the scandal. Our data show that Stapel’s papers are still cited in a favorable way within and without the psychological literature. To ameliorate this problem, we propose that papers should be screened during the review process to monitor citations to retracted papers.