I'll read it if you can find me a single positive reference on Twitter to Cogent Social Science. It's not a journal with any credibility
You're also a Twitter rando. Look at the comments under some of the pieces about it. Furious debate going on by academics & non-academics.
-
-
That's ... not how burden of proof works.
-
What do I need to prove? Have I made any claims about whether Cogent is reputable or not? Obv, I don't think it is.
-
But the "success" of the hoax requires that Cogent have some repute among the community allegedly "exposed." Not only does it not, but 1/
-
I'm researching it now. It's well indexed and Taylor and Francis are proud of it. It doesn't seem much different to the others.
-
So it's of no consequence to you that it is universally denounced by academics?
-
Show me that it is. You keep making these claims. I'm going to research it properly. Not going on Twitter-users claims.
-
"Prove to me that this scam journal no one had ever heard of until today is not actually central to a community I think poorly of."
-
No-one ever heard of it but they universally denounce it. I don't have time for this.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.