  Retracting academic papers is a fundamental tool of quality control when the
validity of papers or the integrity of authors is questioned post-publication.
While retractions do not eliminate papers from the record, they have
far-reaching consequences for retracted authors and their careers, serving as a
visible and permanent signal of potential transgressions. Previous studies have
highlighted the adverse effects of retractions on citation counts and
coauthors' citations; however, the broader impacts beyond these have not been
fully explored. We address this gap leveraging Retraction Watch, the most
extensive data set on retractions and link it to Microsoft Academic Graph, a
comprehensive data set of scientific publications and their citation networks,
and Altmetric that monitors online attention to scientific output. Our
investigation focuses on: 1) the likelihood of authors exiting scientific
publishing following a retraction, and 2) the evolution of collaboration
networks among authors who continue publishing after a retraction. Our
empirical analysis reveals that retracted authors, particularly those with less
experience, tend to leave scientific publishing in the aftermath of retraction,
particularly if their retractions attract widespread attention. We also uncover
that retracted authors who remain active in publishing maintain and establish
more collaborations compared to their similar non-retracted counterparts.
Nevertheless, retracted authors with less than a decade of publishing
experience retain less senior, less productive and less impactful coauthors,
and gain less senior coauthors post-retraction. Taken together, notwithstanding
the indispensable role of retractions in upholding the integrity of the
academic community, our findings shed light on the disproportionate impact that
retractions impose on early-career authors.
