{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01829924650161464, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008611410118406888, 'mean_word_length': 5.241610738255034, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exploring the Influence of Publication Retraction on Citations in Psychology Science

Scientific retraction helps purge the continued use of flawed research. However, the practical influence of it needs to be identified and quantified. In this study, we analyzed the citations of 46 psychological articles from Web of Science to explore the influence of retraction combining qualitative with quantitative methods. Our results show that 1) the overall rate of retraction was only 0.02% in psychology. The mean time from publication to retraction was much longer than that in medical fields; 2) retraction caused a significant decline in the post-retraction citations and triggered a series of changes in the lifecycle of citation; 3) some negative citations of retracted articles resulted from retraction, which occupied only a low percentage. The overall influence of retraction on citation was clear but remained to be improved.