I don't follow you. They track scientific publications and their citation networks. I feel like you are reading something in my post I didn't claim. My point was that the citations can be lost in the sense than they wont be counted by the bibliographic databases that are usually used by administrators to get citation numbers for evaluating researchers and institutions. Of course the citations still exist between the papers. But for a researcher their bibliometric indicators will come out lower after a redaction, in most cases when they are evaluated for grants or career progression.
But that measurement isn’t done through Scopus or Web of Science.
It’s done by evaluating biosketches of grant applicants in their application. It’s not like the grant reviewer checks Scopus for the applicants citation count or something.
I recently reviewed some grant applications and I reviewed the applicants bio sketch including their experience and publications. I didnt count the citations for each paper. But if I did, I certainly wouldn’t count citations for any papers that were retracted.
