[ta988]

No, many honest researchers retract their own papers because they found a problem that cannot be solved by publishing a correction/errata (a kind of mini publication that corrects the original work). It is extremely bad to use number of retracted papers as a judging factor for a researcher. Using the number of retracted papers because of fraud (fabrication of images, data, stealing work, plagiarism...). Self plagiarism is a slightly different case with a much broader grey area.

[kenjackson]

I actually retracted one of my papers. It was before it was published, but after I had submitted it. I had discovered a flaw in my methodology the night before that did have material impact on the results. I was so stressed out for 24 hours until I spoke to my advisor.

My advisor was very chill about it. He said that retractions aren't a big deal and was glad I spotted the issue sooner rather than later.

I corrected the experimental methodology and while the results weren't quite as good, they were still quite good and I got published with the correct results.

[CoastalCoder]

> I corrected the experimental methodology and while the results weren't quite as good, they were still quite good and I got published with the correct results.

I disagree. Your new results were much better, because they were sound.

Very well done.

[dekhn]

Minor detail- I believe this would be called "withdrawing" a paper rather than retraction as it had not been published yet.

[kenjackson]

Yes, that sounds correct. I retract my original comment!