Low awareness, informal channels: How LIS researchers perceive retracted papers and its implications for research integrity.

PURPOSE/SIGNIFICANCE This study investigates the awareness, perceptions, and responses of library and information science (LIS) researchers toward retracted papers, aiming to inform the improvement of research integrity governance.

METHOD/PROCESS A questionnaire survey of 280 LIS researchers examined their sources of retraction information, understanding of causes, perceived consequences, and attitudes toward evaluation. The influence of academic background, publication volume, and discipline was also explored.

RESULT/CONCLUSION Findings indicate generally low retraction awareness and a primary reliance on informal channels. Critically, the analysis reveals several nuanced patterns: (1) Significant disciplinary differences exist in perceiving retraction causes; (2) Opinions are sharply divided on including retraction records in research evaluation, reflecting concerns about uniform responsibility attribution; (3) A considerable proportion of researchers mistakenly view retraction's impact as reversible. These attitudes are strongly associated with educational background and publication experience. In response, this paper proposes five key recommendations: establishing authoritative retraction platforms, improving journal retraction mechanisms, differentiating retraction types in evaluation, strengthening integrity education, and building a coordinated governance framework. These measures contribute to fostering a more transparent, fair, and sustainable scholarly correction ecosystem.