Can You Criticize Science (or Do Science) Without Looking Like an Obsessive? Maybe Not.
We need to normalize the pursuit of accuracy as a good-intentioned piece of the scientific puzzle.
The scandal that exposed fundamental flaws in the published work of eating-behavior researcher Brian Wansink—called Pizzagate, not to be confused with the Pizzagate conspiracy theory—has been instructive on many levels, but perhaps one of the most valuable takeaways is what it’s revealed about the process of correcting the record in academic journals. As Jordan Anaya details in his Medium post “How Journals Responded to PizzaGate,” Anaya, Nick Brown, and their colleagues have faced extreme obstacles in their efforts to expose problems in Wansink’s published works. What’s scary about this story is how much work was required by Anaya and Brown, and how resistant the academic journals have been to outside criticism.
Please continue reading article by clicking on this link.