Abstract

Retractions have traditionally been reserved for correcting the scientific record and discouraging research misconduct. Nonetheless, the potential for actual societal harm resulting from accurately reported published scientific findings, so-called information hazards, has been the subject of several recent article retractions. As these instances increase, the extent of support for such decisions among the scientific community and lay public remains unclear. Undergraduates (Study 1) and federally funded researchers (Study 2) reported their support for retraction decisions described as due to misconduct, honest errors, or potential information hazards. Participants supported retraction on the former two grounds more than the latter. Despite limited support, women remained more receptive to retractions based on information hazards. Activist tendencies additionally predicted undergraduate men’s receptivity. Receptivity toward retraction due to information hazards was unrelated to scientists’ engagement in activism, suggesting that formal scientific training affords researchers an ability to separate personal and professional values in scientific discourse. Findings could inform the development of educational materials that may aid less experienced scientists and the lay public in understanding retraction ethics.

中文翻译：

---

本科生和联邦资助科学家对基于信息危害的撤回支持的差异

摘要

传统上，撤稿是为了纠正科学记录和阻止研究不当行为。尽管如此，准确报道的已发表的科学发现可能造成实际的社会危害，即所谓的信息危害，已经成为最近几篇文章撤回的主题。随着此类事件的增加，科学界和公众对此类决定的支持程度仍不清楚。本科生（研究 1）和联邦政府资助的研究人员（研究 2）报告称，他们支持因不当行为、诚实错误或潜在信息危险而做出的撤回决定。与后者相比，参与者更多地支持前两个理由撤回。尽管支持有限，但女性仍然更容易接受基于信息风险的撤稿。激进主义倾向还预测了本科生男性的接受度。由于信息危害而对撤稿的接受程度与科学家参与激进主义无关，这表明正式的科学培训使研究人员能够在科学话语中区分个人价值观和专业价值观。研究结果可以为教育材料的开发提供信息，这些材料可以帮助经验不足的科学家和普通公众理解撤稿道德。