The Problem
Retracted publications are an important indicator of research integrity, but finding all retractions associated with a specific person is surprisingly difficult. While databases like Crossref contain comprehensive retraction data, author names are recorded inconsistently: The same person might appear as "John Smith", "J. Smith", "Smith, J.", or "John A. Smith" across different publications.
This name ambiguity makes it nearly impossible to reliably search for all retractions by a particular researcher using traditional search methods.
How This Tool Helps
This application solves the name ambiguity problem by using intelligent matching to find potential candidates - authors with retractions whose names are similar enough to your search query that they might be the person you're looking for.
Instead of giving you a simple yes/no result, the tool presents you with all plausible matches and lets you make the final decision about which retractions actually belong to your target person.
How to Use
Step 1: Enter Names
Enter one or more author names you want to search for. You can search for multiple people at once - the tool will find candidates for each name separately.
Step 2: Review Candidates
For each name you entered, the tool will show you a list of candidates - people with retractions whose names match closely enough. Each candidate comes with their associated retracted publications.
Step 3: Flag Retractions
Go through the retractions and flag each one:
- Relevant: This retraction belongs to the correct person AND is a significant retraction worth noting.
- Irrelevant: This is either a different person with a similar name, or the retraction is not significant (e.g., minor corrections, administrative issues).
You can also add a comment to each retraction to store the reasons for your flagging decisions.
Flags and comments belong to the candidate you set them under, not to the publication itself. A retracted paper has many authors, so the same paper can turn up under several searched names and candidates — marking it relevant for one of them leaves it untouched for all the others.
Step 4: Review Results
Use the filters to build your own overview of the results. For example, set the flag filter to "Relevant" to show only the retractions you've confirmed for your target person.
Saving and Continuing Your Work
Automatic Saving
Your "progress" (searched names, flagged retractions with comments, and filters) saves automatically to this browser's localStorage as you work, surviving refreshes and restarts.
But it only lives here:it's gone if you clear this browser's site data, switch browsers or devices, or use private/incognito mode.
Exporting Your Progress
Export routinely: it's the only backup that survives clearing your browser or switching devices.
- Export: save everything to a single JSON file, any time.
- Import:load a file to resume on another browser or device. This replaces all progress currently stored here, so you'll be asked to confirm first.
Tips for Effective Use
- Try different name variations if you're not finding expected results - the matching algorithm is good but not perfect.
- Use context clues like publication dates, co-authors, and research topics to distinguish between people with similar names.
- Your progress is saved automatically in this browser, but export it regularly if you want a backup or plan to switch devices or browsers.
- When in doubt about whether a retraction is "significant", read the retraction notice - it usually explains the reason for the retraction.
FAQ
Where does the retraction data come from?
Crossref acquired the Retraction Watch database in 2023 and now maintains it. This tool uses the Crossref GitLab repository of that data, which is updated regularly.
Why might I see candidates who are clearly different people?
The matching algorithm intentionally casts a wide net to avoid missing legitimate matches. It's better to show you a few false positives that you can quickly dismiss than to miss actual retractions. This is why your human judgment is essential to the process.
What makes a retraction "relevant" vs "irrelevant"?
First, confirm identity: a retraction can only be relevant if you're confident it actually belongs to the person you're looking for, not just someone with a similar name. If you're not sure, flag it as irrelevant or leave it unflagged rather than guessing.
Once identity is settled, deciding significance is your judgment call based on your research needs. Generally, retractions due to data fabrication, plagiarism, or major errors are more significant than those due to honest mistakes, journal administrative issues, or author disputes unrelated to the science.
Is my data stored on a server?
No. Your searched names, flagging decisions and filter settings are stored locally in your browser (localStorage) and automatically persist across page refreshes and browser restarts on the same device. Use the export feature to create a permanent backup of your work or to move your progress to another browser or device.
Why should I export my progress?
Because local storage is not a real backup: it is tied to one browser on one device and disappears if you clear site data, reinstall your browser, or switch machines. Exporting saves a JSON file you control, so you can restore your work, continue on another device or browser, share it with someone else or process it programmatically.