3 ms·
Im not sure why somebody would cite a failed replication unless they’re doing a lit review or meta analysis. Most would just stop citing the refuted paper to sa
by parpfish 3y ago
Im not sure why somebody would cite a failed replication unless they’re doing a lit review or meta analysis. Most would just stop citing the refuted paper to save word/citation counts.
so rather than compare total number of citations, you want to see that:
- citations per year drop once refuted
- if citations continue after refutation, they co-occur with the refutation study
- Staple_Diet 3y agoYes, this is a good point. Tracking citations of the original work in the absence of failed replications would be a more informative metric to measure whether a refuted study was still being used to justify arguments.