Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/117612
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of English and Communication-
dc.creatorXu, SB-
dc.creatorHu, G-
dc.date.accessioned2026-02-26T03:47:25Z-
dc.date.available2026-02-26T03:47:25Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/117612-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMDPI AGen_US
dc.rightsCopyright: © 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.rightsThe 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.subjectPunishmenten_US
dc.subjectResearch funderen_US
dc.subjectResearch funding reviewen_US
dc.subjectResearch integrityen_US
dc.subjectRetraction crisisen_US
dc.titleReckoning with retractions in research funding reviews : the case of Chinaen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume13-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/publications13030041-
dcterms.abstractChina’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.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPublications, Sept 2025, v. 13, no. 3, 41-
dcterms.isPartOfPublications-
dcterms.issued2025-09-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105018046445-
dc.identifier.eissn2304-6775-
dc.identifier.artn41-
dc.description.validate202602 bcch-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOSen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextThis 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.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
publications-13-00041-v2.pdf643.95 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.