Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10397/117612
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor | Department of English and Communication | - |
| dc.creator | Xu, SB | - |
| dc.creator | Hu, G | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-02-26T03:47:25Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2026-02-26T03:47:25Z | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10397/117612 | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | MDPI AG | en_US |
| dc.rights | Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). | en_US |
| dc.rights | The following publication Xu, S. B., & Hu, G. (2025). Reckoning with Retractions in Research Funding Reviews: The Case of China. Publications, 13(3), 41 is available at https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13030041. | en_US |
| dc.subject | Punishment | en_US |
| dc.subject | Research funder | en_US |
| dc.subject | Research funding review | en_US |
| dc.subject | Research integrity | en_US |
| dc.subject | Retraction crisis | en_US |
| dc.title | Reckoning with retractions in research funding reviews : the case of China | en_US |
| dc.type | Journal/Magazine Article | en_US |
| dc.identifier.volume | 13 | - |
| dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.3390/publications13030041 | - |
| dcterms.abstract | China’s retraction crisis has raised concerns about research integrity and accountability within its scientific community and beyond. To address this issue, we proposed in an earlier publication that Chinese research funders incorporate retraction records into the evaluation of research funding applications by establishing a retraction-based review system. This review system would debar researchers with retraction records from applying for funding for a specified period. However, our earlier proposal lacked practical guidance on how to operationalize such a review system. In this article, we expand on our proposal by fleshing out the proposed ten debarment determinants and offering a framework for quantifying the duration of funding ineligibility. Additionally, we outline the critical steps for implementing the retraction-based review system, address the major challenges to its effective and sustainable adoption, and propose viable solutions to these challenges. Finally, we discuss the benefits of implementing the review system, emphasizing its potential to strengthen research integrity and foster a culture of accountability in the Chinese academic community. | - |
| dcterms.accessRights | open access | en_US |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Publications, Sept 2025, v. 13, no. 3, 41 | - |
| dcterms.isPartOf | Publications | - |
| dcterms.issued | 2025-09 | - |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-105018046445 | - |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 2304-6775 | - |
| dc.identifier.artn | 41 | - |
| dc.description.validate | 202602 bcch | - |
| dc.description.oa | Version of Record | en_US |
| dc.identifier.FolderNumber | OA_Scopus/WOS | en_US |
| dc.description.fundingSource | Others | en_US |
| dc.description.fundingText | This research received financial support from Huanggang Normal University through its Scheme of Advanced Incubation Research Projects (202422504) and Think Tank Initiative (202409904). | en_US |
| dc.description.pubStatus | Published | en_US |
| dc.description.oaCategory | CC | en_US |
| Appears in Collections: | Journal/Magazine Article | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| publications-13-00041-v2.pdf | 643.95 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.



