You Might Have to Refute, but Unfortunately the Path to Doing So May Not Be So Clear: A Case Study

Abstract

Refutation articles may be unpopular with journal editors for various reasons, not only because refutations dwell on the already-published rather than present alluring new findings. Refutations can generate discomfort in casting a harsh spotlight on screening processes and may not fare well in editorial decisions regarding acceptance/rejection. This is unfortunate, since refutations are vital to healthy open debate, allowing academics with genuine concerns about published research a voice. Consequently, there should be a place for carefully researched, thoroughly peer-reviewed refutations. This article explores these issues with reference to an illustrative case study of a rejected refutation. This refutation was produced in response to a misleading claim about an English language teacher education project in Oman. The reader is invited to consider whether this refutation, which was favourably peer-reviewed but then rejected by the editor, deserved closer consideration.