The theoretical crisis of trust in science is becoming science’s practical crisis: Perspective through the eyes of citations

Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva 1 *
More Detail
1 Independent researcher, Miki-cho, Japan
* Corresponding Author
J CLIN MED KAZ, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp. 4-6. https://doi.org/10.23950/jcmk/14490
OPEN ACCESS 182 Views 113 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision; validation, visualization, roles/writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, J. A. T. S. The author has read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
 

ABSTRACT

The claimed crisis in science has many origins that, when observed uniquely, might got give the impression of a widespread problem. However, when their integrated networks are appreciated, the crisis then begins to take on a form and life of its own. This letter looks at the basis for a potential crisis in any field of research through the prism of citations, specifically the citation of articles that may become invalidated through retraction, or whose integrity may be weakened through an associated expression of concern (EoC). Fields of research, or bodies of literature of individual researchers, that are weakened by an excessive volume of retractions or EoCs face intellectual and scientific implosion.

CITATION

Teixeira da Silva JA. The theoretical crisis of trust in science is becoming science’s practical crisis: Perspective through the eyes of citations. J CLIN MED KAZ. 2024;21(2):4-6. https://doi.org/10.23950/jcmk/14490

REFERENCES

  • Saltelli A, Funtowicz S. What is science’s crisis really about? Futures. 2017; 91: 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.05.010.
  • Rushforth A, & Hammarfelt B. The rise of responsible metrics as a professional reform movement: A collective action frames account. Quantitative Science Studies. 2023; 4(4): 879–897. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00280.
  • Gureyev VN, Mazov NA. Bibliometrics as a promising tool for solving publication ethics issues. Heliyon. 2022; 8: e09123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09123.
  • van Hugten J. An introduction to complementary explanation. Journal of Trial and Error. 2022; 3(1): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.36850/mr3.
  • Teixeira da Silva JA. A synthesis of the formats for correcting erroneous and fraudulent academic literature, and associated challenges. Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 2022; 53(4): 583–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-022-09607-4.