# Online Engagement with Retracted Articles: Who, When, and How?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.04228 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.04228/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2022.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Can social media provide early warning of retraction? Evidence from critical tweets identified by human annotation and large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.16851/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Retracted research discussed on social media can spread misinformation. Yet we lack an understanding of how retracted articles are mentioned by academic and non-academic users. This is especially relevant on Twitter due to the platform's prominent role in science communication. Here, we analyze the pre- and post-retraction differences in Twitter attention and engagement metrics for over 3,800 retracted English-language articles alongside comparable non-retracted articles. We subset these findings according to five user types detected by our supervised learning classifier: members of the public, academics, bots, science practitioners, and science communicators. We find that retracted articles receive greater user attention (tweet count) and engagement (likes, retweets, and replies) than non-retracted articles, especially among members of the public and bots, with the majority of user engagement happening before retraction. Our results highlight the prominent role of non-experts in discussions of retracted research and suggest an opportunity for social media platforms to contribute towards early detection of problematic scientific research online.