A new journal record: Sage title retracts 678 more papers, tally over 1,500

The retraction of “a final batch” of 678 articles concludes Sage’s investigation into questionable peer review, citation manipulation, and other signs of paper mill activity at one of its journals, according to the publisher. 

Sage has been investigating the Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems (JIFS) since early 2024 for “indicators that raised concerns about the authenticity of the research and the peer review process underlying these articles,” a Sage spokesperson told us. We reported in August on Sage’s retraction of 467 articles from the journal. The publisher retracted another 416 papers in January. With this latest batch, “our investigation into JIFS is now concluded,” the spokesperson said.

Sage acquired JIFS in November 2023 when it bought IOS Press. The indexing company Clarivate raised concerns about the quality of the articles in the journal shortly after and put the journal’s indexing on hold. Its entry on the Clarivate website still shows the “on hold” flag.

The 1,561 retractions mark the most retractions from a single journal, according to the Retraction Watch Database. Also high on the list are journals with mass retractions following acquisitions, including the Journal of Health Care Engineering with 1,074 retractions and Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine with 1,065, both Hindawi journals acquired by Wiley (and later shuttered). Cureus has had 99 retractions since Springer Nature acquired them. 

The April 17 retraction notice states:

Following an investigation in line with the guidance issued by COPE, the publisher has detected one or more of the following indicators in submissions and in the peer review process underlying the acceptance of articles:

1. Patterns of citation manipulation, including citations irrelevant to the research article
2. Incoherent, extraneous text and Tortured phrases [1]
3. Potential unauthorized third-party involvement in the submission process
4. Evidence to suggest collusion between authors and reviewers that was not detected prior to publication
5. Citations to research articles now retracted due to indicators of third-party involvement and manipulated peer review [2]

These indicators raise concerns about the authenticity of the research and the peer review process underlying the following articles. 

The references cite a paper by sleuths Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov on tortured phrases (1), and a commentary by Cabanac on how problematic papers permeate the literature (2). 

The retraction notice also “acknowledges the anonymous volunteers on PubPeer” as well as the Problematic Paper Screener “Feet of Clay” detector, which flags articles citing retracted papers.

Citations to retracted papers are a valuable tool, William Black, CEO of PSIRef, noted in a comment on one of our previous stories. “A quick glance of the reference lists sorted by publication date in reverse chronological order clearly shows the vastness of the paper mill(s) that have used this journal as a conduit,” he wrote. Nearly 2,450 of the journal’s articles turn up on PSIRef, which aggregates retractions, expressions of concern, PubPeer comments and other public comments on scholarly articles. 

The authors of most of the retracted papers are from India and China; our independent check of about 200 of the papers also finds authors from Pakistan, Turkey, Iraq, Iran and several other  countries. 

The names of 25 authors appear on five or more of the papers, by our count. Of that group, four authors have had previous retractions from JIFS and at least three authors have retractions that were part of the more than 13,000 retractions from Hindawi journals. 

Cengiz Kahraman of Istanbul Technical University was an author on 20 of the retracted papers, the most in the batch, our analysis found. He disagrees with the retractions. “They made it without any reason and evidence,” Kahraman told us by email. “I think they used an AI software producing nonsense conclusions.” 

Zeshui Xu of Sichuan University had the next highest tally of 14 articles. Xu has six previous retractions, all from JIFS, according to the Retraction Watch Database. Xu did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Roughly half of the newly retracted papers were published in 2023 and 2024, although the dates extend as far back as 2014. 

Sage paused publishing at the journal while it conducted its investigation. JIFS has resumed publishing, with three new articles published this month.  

— With additional reporting by Alison Abritis and Avery Orrall

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on X or Bluesky, like us on Facebook, follow us on LinkedIn, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].