Abstract

With the recent rise in retraction rates in academic publishing, ‘retraction lag’—the delay between publication and retraction—and ‘citation inertia’—the continued citation of papers post-retraction—have emerged as critical issues. Furthermore, a critical issue was identified wherein the systemic collapse of publishing processes has led to instances of mass retractions. Given the nature of its subjects and methodologies, the social sciences entail high ethical and methodological complexity during data collection and research design, necessitating distinct considerations and addressing challenges different from those in the natural sciences. Accordingly, this study conducted a bibliometric analysis of retracted papers within the social sciences indexed in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) of the Web of Science to examine: 1) the time-to-retraction; 2) the distribution and patterns of citations for retracted papers; and 3) the status of journals and publishers with high retraction frequencies. The analysis revealed that the average time-to-retraction was 27.45 months (median: 17 months). The average number of citations per retracted paper was 15.12, with the most highly cited paper accumulating 2,228 citations. Notably, in the case of the most cited paper, 13.33% of the total citations occurred after the retraction, confirming the severity of citation inertia. Finally, observing that 42.65% of the retracted papers were published by the affiliated publishers Wiley and HINDAWI, this study highlights the critical collapse of the peer review system within “Special Issue” operations and examines the process leading to mass retractions and subsequent journal discontinuations. This study is significant in that it comprehensively assesses the impact of retracted papers on the academic community and provides foundational data for fostering a healthy and robust academic ecosystem.