@HPluckrose good work Helen!
-
-
Replying to @citation_needed @HPluckrose
BTW,
@RealPeerReview has just started cranking out the papers again. I sense that they're not even close to done.1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @citation_needed @RealPeerReview
Real Peer Review is the best response to claims we're exaggerating the problem. I'm only sorry, I couldn't link the lot!
2 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
What process are they using to select and cite? Is it a randomised sample? How are they assessing the validity of published content?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
You'd have to ask them but it looks like the criteria is 'Is this clearly completely nuts?'
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Okay. So the existence of a non-zero number of nuts articles self-assessed by an anonymous account is sufficient hard evidence for you?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
That a load of really bad papers are passing peer review? Yes, but I don't need this personally. I'm in the humanities myself. See it daily.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
If your aim is to constructively help humanities build stronger walls against dodgy papers, antagonising them is seriously counterproductive
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I don't attack the humanities. I strongly criticise the bad scholars in it whilst praising & using the work of reasonable empiricists.
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.