Ronagh Maryam, Souder Lawrence
Department of Culture and Communication, Drexel University, 3141 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Dec;21(6):1537-49. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9619-8. Epub 2014 Dec 16.
The goal of most scientific research published in peer-review journals is to discover and report the truth. However, the research record includes tongue-in-cheek papers written in the conventional form and style of a research paper. Although these papers were intended to be taken ironically, bibliographic database searches show that many have been subsequently cited as valid research, some in prestigious journals. We attempt to understand why so many readers cited such ironic science seriously. We draw from the literature on error propagation in research publication for ways categorize citations. We adopt the concept of irony from the fields of literary and rhetorical criticism to detect, characterize, and analyze the interpretations in the more than 60 published research papers that cite an instance of ironic science. We find a variety of interpretations: some citing authors interpret the research as valid and accept it, some contradict or reject it, and some acknowledge its ironic nature. We conclude that publishing ironic science in a research journal can lead to the same troubles posed by retracted research, and we recommend relevant changes to publication guidelines.
发表在同行评审期刊上的大多数科学研究的目标是发现并报告真相。然而,研究记录中包含以传统研究论文形式和风格撰写的诙谐论文。尽管这些论文旨在被当作讽刺作品,但文献数据库搜索显示,许多此类论文后来被当作有效研究引用,有些还被发表在著名期刊上。我们试图理解为何如此多读者认真引用这类讽刺性科学研究。我们借鉴研究出版中错误传播的文献来对引用进行分类。我们采用文学和修辞批评领域的讽刺概念,以检测、描述和分析60多篇引用讽刺性科学研究实例的已发表研究论文中的解读。我们发现了多种解读:一些引用作者将该研究视为有效并予以接受,一些则予以反驳或拒绝,还有一些承认其讽刺性质。我们得出结论,在研究期刊上发表讽刺性科学研究可能会导致与撤稿研究相同的问题,我们建议对出版指南进行相关修改。