I've read hundreds of papers with mistakes - errors big and small - at the absolute minimum these should be corrected, but if the entire paper is flawed what else do you do?
-
-
Show this thread
-
I think this attitude often harks back to decades long past, where you had a physical journal where letters to the editor were read as much as studies themselves
Show this thread -
But these days, letters are barely read, but studies often go viral and are seen by 100,000s. What's even the point of writing a letter if it doesn't lead to correction/retraction?
Show this thread -
Sorry, initial tweet should read "potential" not "purpose"
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
'with the purpose to cause harm'...you think the authors intend it to cause harm?
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I agreed with his premise up until the last point. Sure don't retract for all those other reasons, but as soon as we get to "potential to cause serious harm" because of flaws then absolutely retraction is justified.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
purpose to cause harm?
-
Typo, clarified in the thread
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
If no one disagreed we would still be bleeding people for a “cure” for a headache.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.