tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-192445222306631874.post8612590114426405193..comments2022-03-30T02:22:30.689-07:00Comments on Xenia Schmalz's blog: Naming, not shaming: Criticising a weak result is not the same as launching a personal attackXenia Schmalzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02238923475669435076noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-192445222306631874.post-33110575406220582332016-06-20T12:47:20.493-07:002016-06-20T12:47:20.493-07:00As a very, very early career researcher, I find a ...As a very, very early career researcher, I find a good part of the discussion about QRP intimidating, and I greatly appreciate your point of view! I know it is a lot to ask, but if I were one of the authors in the examples above, I would probably appreciate being contacted as well. The fact that I published something (has yet to happen in the field of my thesis, so purely hypothetical) doesn't mean that I stop thinking about it. As it is likely that I still work on the same topic, I might have found room for improvement myself. A direct discussion of potential issues could thus be useful for your paper or even the research topic in question in general, while also giving me the possibility to save my face, if only "behind the scenes".Julia Eberlenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08048831412901301639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-192445222306631874.post-37779656544564687882016-06-19T02:39:30.584-07:002016-06-19T02:39:30.584-07:00Excellent post, captures the problems with this so...Excellent post, captures the problems with this sort of criticism nicely. Criticism is essential but I agree people can take it personally (especially if it's their idea or the study that has made them famous). We need to try and be objective (which is obviously difficult). Perhaps before publishing you could try post-publication peer review (if the journal it's published in allows it). Alternatively you could contact the authors politely outlining your concerns with the paper? Then you can publish your clear but not overly harsh criticisms confident you've engaged in a dialogue with them (or at least tried). Someone (can't remember who, will try and find out) argued we should have a "year zero" rule: all past instances of QRP's are forgiven and we start afresh. I like this idea and it will get more people to be open about their past use of QRP's. I agree that 2 and 3 would also lower my estimation of a researcher. I would also add anyone who refuses to admit they used QRP's, even when there is evidence to the contrary. Of course there will be some who legitimately haven't but they are some common and so easy to do I'd be surprised.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18391916995770978940noreply@blogger.com