How to get a flawed systematic review and meta-analysis withdrawn from publication: a detailed example
Cochrane normally requires authors to agree to withdraw completed reviews that have been published. This withdrawal in the face of resistance from the authors is extraordinary. There is a lot to be learned from this letter and the accompanying documents in terms of Courtney calmly and methodically laying out a compelling case for withdrawal of a review with important clinical practice and policy implications.
Part 1: Reviewed as the clinical trial that it is, the power posing paper should never have been published. Has too much already been written about Amy Cuddy’s power pose paper? The conversation should not be stopped until its focus shifts and we change our ways of talking about psychological science. The dominant narrative is … Continue reading "Calling out pseudoscience, radically changing the conversation about Amy Cuddy’s power posing paper"
Should have seen it coming: Once high-flying Psychological Science article lies in pieces on the ground
Life is too short for wasting time probing every instance of professional organizations promoting bad science when they have an established record of doing just that. There were lots of indicators that’s what we were dealing with in the Association for Psychological Science (APS) recent campaign for the now discredited and retracted ‘sadness prevents us … Continue reading "Should have seen it coming: Once high-flying Psychological Science article lies in pieces on the ground"
No way, call for retraction. Would you pay $1,000 for the right to criticize bad science in the journal in which it originally appeared? That is what it costs to participate in postpublication peer review at the online Nature Publishing Group (NPG) journal, Translational Psychiatry. Damn, NPG is a high-fashion brand, but peer review is … Continue reading "Pay $1000 to criticize a bad ‘blood test for depression’ article?"