~ archived since 2018 ~
~ archived since 2018 ~
| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.You're absolutely right. But it appears that any coherent reason why this article would be retracted besides "woke mob got it taken down" gets downvoted to hell in this sub. It's a shame. | /r/MensRights | 23/12/20 01:26 AM |
| -3 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.You are right to point out that the proportion of social science papers in Nat Comm is low. In my field we tend to think of it as a journal for stuff that doesn’t fit elsewhere that people submit to to get the Nature name on their CV. Considering the methodology of the study, do you consider yourself to have been mentored by all of your senior coauthors? I would bet not. This definition of “mentorship” is precisely the definition that is being used by the study. Speaking of which, if you’re vers… | /r/MensRights | 22/12/20 09:15 AM |
| 6 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.Thanks! It's fine though. I realize that the majority of folks in this thread have not and will not read the study while I have read it since I am a scientist who cares about mentoring. The irony is that the same type of behavior that is vilified on this sub in other communities seems to be acceptable to its members when displayed within the community. | /r/MensRights | 22/12/20 07:57 AM |
| -7 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.Nature Communications is not even close to the most prestigious journal around. It's merely a secondary journal published by the Nature Publishing Group. You're thinking of the journal Nature which is different. While peer review is indeed rigorous, it is not infallible. There are countless examples of bad science that survived peer review and was published (even in top tier journals!). An example of this is the infamous Wakefield study published in the Lancet that claimed that vaccines cause au… | /r/MensRights | 22/12/20 07:42 AM |
| 2 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.The first thing to note about the study is that the question that is being asked is an interesting one. Stated simply the question is: does the sex of a mentor affect a mentee's success? That being said, there are numerous issues with the study: There are reliability concerns about the dataset that was used in the study. A more reliable dataset is available (and this was brought up in peer review!) but the authors claimed in their response to the reviewers that they opted to use this dataset to … | /r/MensRights | 22/12/20 07:35 AM |
| -18 | Study found that having male mentors is correlated with more success. Woke mob throws a fit, paper gets retracted.The conclusions of the paper were not supported by the data and analysis, which lead to the retraction. The retraction of the paper had nothing to do with anything else besides the study being poorly executed. This is the self-correcting nature of science on display. I invite those in this thread to actually read the manuscript and decide if the conclusions were justified or not. | /r/MensRights | 22/12/20 06:36 AM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter