Something I think about a lot is that studies don't get retracted because they're bad, they get retracted because they are famous
-
-
Anyway, when people get mad about how the papers that are retracted tend to be the big flashy studies I just think that they are ignorant about how the whole error-checking in science thing works
Show this thread -
Also, I cannot stress enough how foolish it makes you look if you say "why are you only going after THESE studies and not all the bad ones?" Error detection in science is a job that pays in sleepless nights and ennui. No one pays us to do any of this
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think this is true 99.9% of the time, and there is an ocean of terrible research out there on any topic you’d care to name.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Worth noting that retraction doesn’t always stop the “famous” papers from spreading either eg the terrible Brian Hooker MMR paper is doing the rounds again lately
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But if all bad papers got retracted, what would we show our students when we want them to see/analyze the difference between good and bad papers?
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.