Honestly, I don’t know if I’m with @daniela_witten or @NAChristakis.
1) Paper makes bombastic conclusions that are unjustified by data.
2) Point 1 holds for other papers in area BUT their conclusions are not as harmful
3) Is retraction of one paper easy out for @NatureComms?https://twitter.com/daniela_witten/status/1329663766993072129 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @boazbaraktcs @daniela_witten and
I am disappointed that this is even a debate. As a
#WomenInSTEM this shows mountain of bias we have to live with. It is pervasive. The damage it will do to further deter women from entering STEM and/or seeking out women mentors should alone be enough to burn this garbage1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @AnimaAnandkumar @daniela_witten and
Hi
@AnimaAnandkumar - I completely agree with you the paper is both both unsound and harmful. It was a mistake to publish it. Women in science face enough barriers as it is! Question is what is the best way to mitigate the harm that was done, and I really don’t know the answer.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @boazbaraktcs @daniela_witten and
I think the best course of action is retraction with detailed explanation of the deep flaws in the paper and the way this paper was reviewed.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Not sure if you saw reviews. So tone deaf! Shows how lack of diversity creates blind spots. One reviewer commented how this was not surprising = confirms all my biases
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.