In the light of a small number of complaints received following publication of the original research article cited above, Frontiers carried out a detailed investigation of the academic, ethical, and legal aspects of the work. This investigation did not identify any issues with the academic and ethical aspects of the study. It did, however, determine that the legal context is insufficiently clear and therefore Frontiers wishes to retract the published article. The authors understand this decision, while they stand by their article and regret the limitations on academic freedom which can be caused by legal factors.
Happily enough, the first author does not see a problem, and published it under his list of publications (59 pages pdf]).
Two snippets:
Conspiracist ideation has been repeatedly implicated in the rejection of scientific propositions, although empirical evidence to date has been sparse. A recent study involving visitors to climate blogs found that conspiracist ideation was associated with the rejection of climate science and the rejection of other scientific propositions such as the link between lung cancer and smoking, and between HIV and AIDS.
...
The survey queried people's belief in the free market (which previous research had identified as an important predictor of the rejection of climate science), their acceptance of climate science, their acceptance of other scientific propositions such as the link between HIV and AIDS, and most important in the present context, conspiracist ideation.
In the light of a small number of complaints received following publication of the original research article cited above, Frontiers carried out a detailed investigation of the academic, ethical, and legal aspects of the work. This investigation did not identify any issues with the academic and ethical aspects of the study. It did, however, determine that the legal context is insufficiently clear and therefore Frontiers wishes to retract the published article. The authors understand this decision, while they stand by their article and regret the limitations on academic freedom which can be caused by legal factors.
Happily enough, the first author does not see a problem, and published it under his list of publications (59 pages pdf]).
Two snippets:
Conspiracist ideation has been repeatedly implicated in the rejection of scientific propositions, although empirical evidence to date has been sparse. A recent study involving visitors to climate blogs found that conspiracist ideation was associated with the rejection of climate science and the rejection of other scientific propositions such as the link between lung cancer and smoking, and between HIV and AIDS.
...
The survey queried people's belief in the free market (which previous research had identified as an important predictor of the rejection of climate science), their acceptance of climate science, their acceptance of other scientific propositions such as the link between HIV and AIDS, and most important in the present context, conspiracist ideation.
Well, it's a sad commentary on the state of scholarly publishing. But for myself, the minute I see something with the word "ideation" in it, I know it's going to be downhill from then on. This one actually had it twice in the title! A double red flag.
Lois
I belong to the Society of Environmental Journalists and there has been some talk about this on the mail lists. Turns out Frontiers in Psychology is not very well respected to begin with and there is a massive fallout of researchers boycotting the journal over the retraction. Methinks they hath jumped the shark.
Yea that whole study and reactions to it are a can of worms.
Yet, the reaction of the denialist community did a wonderful job of reverifying his claims.
Still, for me it’s another one of them psychology studies of the obvious…. i sort of see the point, but for god sakes why can’t everyone recognize the ‘thing’ to begin with?
But, since it’s been brought up, I can’t resist giving my pals at SKEP another pinch of their pompous little cheeks.
Friday, March 21, 2014
Of Recursive Fury, SkepticForum and science denialist's strategy of harassment
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2014/03/recursivefury-skepticforum-tactics.html