The Career Effects of Scandal: Evidence from Scientific Retractions
We investigate how the scientific community's perception of a scientist's prior work changes when one of his articles is retracted. Relative to non-retracted control authors, faculty members who experience a retraction see the citation rate to their earlier, non-retracted articles drop by 10% on average, consistent with the Bayesian intuition that the market inferred their work was mediocre all along. We then investigate whether the eminence of the retracted author and the cause of the retraction (fraud vs. mistake) shape the magnitude of the penalty. We find that eminent scientists are more harshly penalized than their less distinguished peers in the wake of a retraction, but only in cases involving fraud or misconduct. When the retraction event had its source in “honest mistakes,” we find no evidence of differential stigma between high- and low-status faculty members.
-
-
Copy CitationPierre Azoulay, Alessandro Bonatti, and Joshua L. Krieger, "The Career Effects of Scandal: Evidence from Scientific Retractions," NBER Working Paper 21146 (2015), https://doi.org/10.3386/w21146.Download Citation
-
Published Versions
Pierre Azoulay & Alessandro Bonatti & Joshua L. Krieger, 2017. "The career effects of scandal: Evidence from scientific retractions," Research Policy, . citation courtesy of 
Related
More from the NBER
In addition to working papers, the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter, the NBER Digest, the Bulletin on Health, and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports, video lectures, and interviews.
