Disagree with a published paper? Don't like its conclusions, politically inimical to you? Find the methods imperfect? Do your own research to rebut it. Publish your critiques. But do not call for retraction of papers because of 'potential to inflict serious harm.' @NatureComms https://twitter.com/pollyp1/status/1329455882481131524
Here is a prior paper by @waterbarnes shedding more light on this topic. To me, this is how science proceeds: people publish work, seeking the truth. And even papers with limitations can help us see the truth. https://twitter.com/waterbarnes/status/1329085950857605130
Another request that editors retract this paper on grounds that letter-writers do not like how the authors 1) operationalized/measured key variables; 2) discuss their results. None of this satisfies COPE standards for retraction. https://twitter.com/network_alba/status/1330933256624230404?s=20 @NatureComms should resist
I hope @NatureComms, a journal I respect, will resist these unscientific and illiberal calls to retract this paper. And I hope they will remove their notation of 'investigating the author's interpretation of their data.' Instead, they should publish critiques or more papers.
You can follow @NAChristakis.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.