"他们只会让真相沉默:COVID-19 撤稿与科学政治化。

IF 3.5 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Rod Abhari, Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
{"title":"\"他们只会让真相沉默:COVID-19 撤稿与科学政治化。","authors":"Rod Abhari, Emőke-Ágnes Horvát","doi":"10.1177/09636625241290142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Retracted COVID-19 articles have circulated widely on social media. Although retractions are intended to correct the scientific record, when trust in science is low, they may instead be interpreted as evidence of censorship or simply ignored. We performed a content analysis of tweets about the two most widely shared retracted COVID-19 articles, Mehra20 and Rose21, before and after their retractions. When Mehra20 was seen as a politicized attack on Donald Trump and hydroxychloroquine, its retraction was broadly shared as proof that the article had been published for political reasons. However, when Rose21 was seen as evidence of vaccine harm by vaccine opponents, its retraction was either ignored or else framed as a conspiracy to censor the truth. These results demonstrate how retractions can be selectively used by scientific counterpublics to reframe the regulation of science as evidence of its institutional corruption.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"9636625241290142"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"They Only Silence the Truth\\\": COVID-19 retractions and the politicization of science.\",\"authors\":\"Rod Abhari, Emőke-Ágnes Horvát\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09636625241290142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Retracted COVID-19 articles have circulated widely on social media. Although retractions are intended to correct the scientific record, when trust in science is low, they may instead be interpreted as evidence of censorship or simply ignored. We performed a content analysis of tweets about the two most widely shared retracted COVID-19 articles, Mehra20 and Rose21, before and after their retractions. When Mehra20 was seen as a politicized attack on Donald Trump and hydroxychloroquine, its retraction was broadly shared as proof that the article had been published for political reasons. However, when Rose21 was seen as evidence of vaccine harm by vaccine opponents, its retraction was either ignored or else framed as a conspiracy to censor the truth. These results demonstrate how retractions can be selectively used by scientific counterpublics to reframe the regulation of science as evidence of its institutional corruption.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"9636625241290142\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241290142\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Understanding of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625241290142","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

被撤回的 COVID-19 文章在社交媒体上广为流传。虽然撤稿的目的是纠正科学记录,但在科学信任度较低的情况下,撤稿可能会被解释为审查的证据,或者干脆被忽略。我们对COVID-19中被撤稿次数最多的两篇文章Mehra20和Rose21在撤稿前后的推文进行了内容分析。当 Mehra20 被视为对唐纳德-特朗普和羟氯喹的政治化攻击时,其撤稿被广泛传播,证明该文章是出于政治原因而发表的。然而,当 Rose21 被疫苗反对者视为疫苗危害的证据时,其撤稿要么被忽略,要么被诬陷为审查真相的阴谋。这些结果表明了科学反公众如何有选择性地利用撤稿来重构科学监管,将其作为体制腐败的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"They Only Silence the Truth": COVID-19 retractions and the politicization of science.

Retracted COVID-19 articles have circulated widely on social media. Although retractions are intended to correct the scientific record, when trust in science is low, they may instead be interpreted as evidence of censorship or simply ignored. We performed a content analysis of tweets about the two most widely shared retracted COVID-19 articles, Mehra20 and Rose21, before and after their retractions. When Mehra20 was seen as a politicized attack on Donald Trump and hydroxychloroquine, its retraction was broadly shared as proof that the article had been published for political reasons. However, when Rose21 was seen as evidence of vaccine harm by vaccine opponents, its retraction was either ignored or else framed as a conspiracy to censor the truth. These results demonstrate how retractions can be selectively used by scientific counterpublics to reframe the regulation of science as evidence of its institutional corruption.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
9.80%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Public Understanding of Science is a fully peer reviewed international journal covering all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Public Understanding of Science is the only journal to cover all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Topics Covered Include... ·surveys of public understanding and attitudes towards science and technology ·perceptions of science ·popular representations of science ·scientific and para-scientific belief systems ·science in schools
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信