Analysis reveals retraction of Malaysian research papers three times higher than average rate

  • 2024-01-01 08:01 AM

KUALA LUMPUR: A professor has warned that local academics are in the spotlight after Malaysia was recently placed sixth in a list of countries with the highest rate of retractions for their research papers.

Universiti Malaya associate dean of Continuing Education Prof Dr Mohammad Tariqur Rahman said “one or another form of misconduct to boost their publications is the major cause of the retractions”.

“Many Malaysian academics are in shock after finding that we are in sixth position in the list of countries with the highest rate of retractions.”

The analysis by academic research organisation Nature found that for every 10,000 Malaysian research papers published, 17.2 were retracted, which is about three times higher than the average rate for all countries analysed.

Mohammad Tariqur said while the figure may seem small to a layman, having that many retractions amounts to a major hiccup in academic circles.

The other countries on the list were Saudi Arabia with 30.6 retractions per 10,000 research papers published, Pakistan with 28.1, Russia had 24.9, China recorded 23.5, Eygpt had 18.8, Iran with 16.7 and India had 15.2.

The articles were retracted over “concerns that the peer review process has been compromised” and “systematic manipulation of the publication and peer-review process”, Nature reported.

Mohammad Tariqur said: “Keeping aside any assumption of misconduct in (the authoring of) their papers, it is now clear that papers authored by Malaysian academics are under the spotlight of retraction watch.”

He said in 2022, a paper was published in the journal Accountability in Research, that reported an analysis of authorship patterns of 94 academics from three research universities in Malaysia who produced 4,561 papers from 1990 to 2020.

“Using different years as cut-off periods, it was observed that the appearance of the academics as co-authors in their papers had steeply risen in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

“This period corresponds to the adoption of the ‘publish or perish policy’ by the Higher Education Ministry in Malaysia.”

Mohammad Tariqur said the increased number of authors in the multi-author papers and the appearance of the selected academics as co-authors reflected the extent to which collaborative research was boosted.

“On the other hand, the sudden rise in the number of co-authored papers might imply that they might not have proper intellectual contributions in those papers where they are credited as co-authors.

“While the analysis does not say if the academics had to resort to one or another form of misconduct to boost their publications, it shows the pressure that pushed them against the wall to prove their publication productivity beyond their previous trend.”

Mohammad Tariqur said a sudden increase of three to four-fold publication productivity in a given period attests to a “probable lack of authenticity and reproducibility of the results in the published research”.

He said there are a few probable consequences if Malaysia continues to remain under the spotlight and our academic papers are questioned.

“Firstly, no matter what positions Malaysian universities will have in the global university rankings, a parallel ranking on the highest rate of retractions will jeopardise the aspiration of making Malaysia a reliable higher education hub in the region.

“Secondly, if the list of retractions is brought down to the institutional level, which is most likely to happen shortly, then the affected institution and its academic staff will lose their reputation and recognition at the national level and global levels.

“And thirdly, the justification of a future appointment or promotion of individuals who might be identified with some of their papers being retracted might raise major concerns.”

Mohammad Tariqur put the blame squarely on policymakers who forced the “publish or perish” policy on academicians and researchers “for driving them to prove their productivity, fake or otherwise”.

“If policymakers in academia do not read the messages between the lines of retractions, which calls for a reversal of academic misconduct, it will be nearly impossible to overcome.”