Teaching About Ethics and the Process of Science Using Retracted Publications

Burnett, Stephen C.; Singiser, Richard H.; Clower, Caroline

doi:10.2505/4/jcst14_043_03_24

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[26]." Support conformational analysis [9,22] "Conformational analysis of 4 was performed with Schrödinger MacroModel 2016 by following the method of Willoughby et al [35]." Successful example [53] "The successful characterization of karlotoxin 2 (KmTx2) followed by KmTx8 [17,28,33,40] "Therefore, we turned to a protocol that relies on density functional theory-based computations of 1H and 13C NMR chemical shifts and the use of statistical tools to assign the experimental data to the correct isomer of a compound [28].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While retracted papers are the easiest to enumerate (and explicitly marked), their citation underestimates the scope of the problem since retraction is a recent and field-specific practice. Another common practice is to silently abandon works; such abandoned papers "contain conclusions that are refuted by later studies while still remaining in the record of scientific publications" [9].…”

Section: Scope and Importance Of The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards Knowledge Maintenance in Scientific Digital Libraries with the Keystone Framework

Schneider

2020

Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific digital libraries speed dissemination of scientific publications, but also the propagation of invalid or unreliable knowledge. Although many papers with known validity problems are highly cited, no auditing process is currently available to determine whether a citing paper's findings fundamentally depend on invalid or unreliable knowledge. To address this, we introduce a new framework, the keystone framework, designed to identify when and how citing unreliable findings impacts a paper, using argumentation theory and citation context analysis. Through two pilot case studies, we demonstrate how the keystone framework can be applied to knowledge maintenance tasks for digital libraries, including addressing citations of a non-reproducible paper and identifying statements most needing validation in a high-impact paper. We identify roles for librarians, database maintainers, knowledgebase curators, and research software engineers in applying the framework to scientific digital libraries. CCS CONCEPTS• Information systems~Digital libraries and archives • Computing methodologies~Discourse, dialogue and pragmatics •Applied computing~Document management and text process~Document metadata 1

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Scope and Importance Of The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Knowledge Maintenance in Scientific Digital Libraries with the Keystone Framework

Schneider

2020

Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have always argued that retractions are a good window into the self-correcting nature of science, and a number of researchers apparently agree. We know that faculty have used Retraction Watch in their syllabi, and at least one group of professors even wrote a paper on why retractions are useful for teaching science ( 6 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Studies of Retractions Tell Us

Marcus

Oransky

2014

J Microbiol Biol Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The retraction is receiving a growing amount of attention as an important event in scientific and scholarly publishing. Not only are some journals becoming increasingly open in their handling of the articles they withdraw—allowing researchers to gain important insights into the work of their colleagues—but scholars, too, have greater access to the reasons for retractions, information that is dramatically reshaping our understanding of such events. As this article will demonstrate, recent research has inverted the accepted lore about why retractions happen and their impact.

show abstract

“…S. Epstein, 1998, p. 1403; see also Kovac, 1996). Even retracted articles have been leveraged in educational contexts to teach students about the evolution of scientific knowledge and to impress upon them the idea that “publication is no guarantee of accuracy” (Burnett, Singiser, & Clower, 2014, p. 25).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning from mistakes: Teaching students about errata, corrigenda, and nonretraction corrections to the research literature.

Haas¹,

Rouse²

2022

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publication guidelines indicate that when substantive errors in research are noted after the publication of a research report, a correction (also known as an erratum or corrigendum) should be issued. Although such corrections are published with some regularity in psychology and in other scientific fields, the issue of corrections to the scientific literature is seldom addressed in the kinds of research methods textbooks often used in undergraduate psychology courses. This article briefly reviews the existing literature on the frequency and effectiveness of scientific correction generally and extends that literature to the domain of psychology specifically, with an emphasis on what undergraduate students should know.

show abstract

Teaching About Ethics and the Process of Science Using Retracted Publications

Cited by 12 publications

References 48 publications

Towards Knowledge Maintenance in Scientific Digital Libraries with the Keystone Framework

Towards Knowledge Maintenance in Scientific Digital Libraries with the Keystone Framework

What Studies of Retractions Tell Us

Learning from mistakes: Teaching students about errata, corrigenda, and nonretraction corrections to the research literature.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About