Blog: Hilda Bastian: "Bad and Good(-ish) News on the Abstract Spin Cycle"

Discussion in 'Research methodology news and research' started by Andy, Aug 30, 2022.

  1. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    22,308
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    "Abstracts are central to the science communication process. The words in them can lead searchers to find a paper. Because they’re the most read part, their messages can be the only take-aways. And they can determine whether or not someone goes on to read more of the work. If they’re free to read and the rest of the paper is behind a paywall, it won’t even be possible for everyone to go further.

    All of which makes spin in abstracts a menace, whether it’s misleading cherry-picked content – like including the only “significant” result – or garden-variety hype. When I last wrote a post on the evidence about abstracts, Isabelle Boutron and colleagues had reported on a trial randomizing cancer clinicians to evaluate abstracts of clinical trials with and without spin. The participants were all themselves corresponding authors of clinical trials, so not your average clinicians. They were more likely to say a treatment was beneficial if they’d read an abstract with spin – but also more likely to want to see the full paper."

    https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2022/08/30/bad-and-good-ish-news-on-the-abstract-spin-cycle/

     
    EzzieD, Ariel, rainy and 11 others like this.
  2. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    If people cannot be relied upon to summarise, accurately, their research and results, why would one rely upon their full, unsummarised reports?
     
    Wits_End, EzzieD, Ariel and 12 others like this.
  3. BrightCandle

    BrightCandle Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    338
    Once you have been caught making findings up in your abstracts any respectable journal should blacklist you completely. Why continue to let dishonest actors publish false papers, it only hurts the reputation of the journal at that stage and more widely science. When someone tells you who they are the first time you should believe them.
     
    Wits_End, EzzieD, Ariel and 9 others like this.
  4. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    53,396
    Location:
    UK
    Peer reviewers should have it as part of their remit as should journal editors to ensure abstracts accurately reflect research findings.
     
    Wits_End, Mithriel, EzzieD and 13 others like this.
  5. CRG

    CRG Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,857
    Location:
    UK
    Difficult to make something contractual on "unpaid" peer reviewers. Of course journals could start paying for peer reviews but then that might upset the business structure of academic journal publishing which is based on extracting as much value for the publishers as Government funding and the student fee supported Higher Education market will stand. :grumpy:
     
    Ariel, rainy, Hutan and 3 others like this.
  6. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,490
    Location:
    Australia
    Yep. There should be zero tolerance for this abusive fraudulent behaviour, and it should be very public too. Name and shame and permanently blacklist.
     
    EzzieD, Ariel, chrisb and 3 others like this.

Share This Page