Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

chicagomaroon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 106 posts

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#11

Post by civilized »

defrost wrote: post #2

The paper itself is a chuckle fest (as are many Intelligencer submissions) and concludes: > The goal here has been neither to challenge nor to confirm Darwin’s and other researchers’ observations of greater male variability for any given species or any given trait, but rather to propose an elementary mathematical theory based on biological/evolutionary mechanisms that might serve as a starting point to help explain h…

High-energy physicists make up theories for the mechanisms behind phenomena that may or may not even exist all the time.

One can question the utility of this but no one strings up such authors for heresy.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#13

Post by darawk »

UberFly wrote: post #12

They had to be "cleared of wrongdoing" after they criticized a mathematics paper? The morality police in the US aren't so different than in other places.

No,

> After Hill’s paper was published in a second journal, the New York Journal of Mathematics (NYJM), University of Chicago mathematics professor Benson Farb, who is married to Wilkinson, partook in the editorial decision to retract the paper. Hill wrote to the University claiming that their actions constituted a violation of his freedom of speech, but the University found no evidence of wrongdoing after an investigation earlier this year.

The wrongdoing of which they had to be cleared was a conflict of interest, due to her husband being the editor of one of the journals.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#14

Post by r3ctilinear »

jollybean wrote: post #9

Imagine the 'indirect effect' that these kinds of things have on discussions throughout the industry. Reddit just had a discussion about the video 'Fat' (i.e. 'Bad') by Weird Al Mocking Michael Jackson. It 'couldn't be made today' first because it wouldn't even be pitched in the first place - too much risk. They'll try another idea. Maybe it's 'not nice' in 2022 to use the term 'fat' - or, maybe it's not so bad, and…

Weird Al's "Fat" did not mock Michael Jackson. The "Fat" song was a parody which continued on the theme established with "Eat It". Mockery is quite different to parody.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#15

Post by mgamache »

Retracting a paper should only be done in select situations, like fraud, plagiarism or violating ethical guidelines. Was any of that present? If you retract papers that were just 'wrong' you would be retracting at least 50% of the work published in a lot of fields. Furthermore you would leave a blind spot in the research, other researchers might try and pursue those retracted ideas not realizing they are dead ends.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#16

Post by baazaa »

It's not novel to claim that the possibility of men going full Genghis Khan might result in greater trait-variability for men and explain the Lek paradox and so forth.

The paper seems to distance itself from Bateman's principle but I can't figure how it meaningfully differs besides being framed very weirdly.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#17

Post by jacknews »

mgamache wrote: post #15

Retracting a paper should only be done in select situations, like fraud, plagiarism or violating ethical guidelines. Was any of that present? If you retract papers that were just 'wrong' you would be retracting at least 50% of the work published in a lot of fields. Furthermore you would leave a blind spot in the research, other researchers might try and pursue those retracted ideas not realizing they are dead ends.

I agree, but it's not clear from the article if the paper is even wrong.

As I understand it there's robust evidence in support of the hypothesis itself (GMVH), and this paper was an attempt to model how the effect could come about.

It looks to me more like it was retracted for being distasteful to the journal editor's wife.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#18

Post by barrysteve »

According to a document drop publicly released on Retraction Watch, Senechal wrote to Hill and Tabachnikov, concerned about the “very real possibility that the right-wing media may pick [the article] up and hype it internationally.” She proposed a round-table discussion be held in lieu of publishing the paper, one that never occurred.

I don't understand why the people involved would care if some political group picked up the paper. The best political move for the profs in this case is to state their criticisms of the paper and move on. Stamping down on it just makes it louder. Ignoring the valid academic criticisms of the piece makes it look deliberately pushed out to the world. Just comment and move on.

This feels like another academic advertisement for internet politics. The 'sexism makes politics' angle is so worn out lately.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#19

Post by eska »

jacknews wrote: post #17
mgamache wrote: post #15

Retracting a paper should only be done in select situations, like fraud, plagiarism or violating ethical guidelines. Was any of that present? If you retract papers that were just 'wrong' you would be retracting at least 50% of the work published in a lot of fields. Furthermore you would leave a blind spot in the research, other researchers might try and pursue those retracted ideas not realizing they are dead ends.

I agree, but it's not clear from the article if the paper is even wrong. As I understand it there's robust evidence in support of the hypothesis itself (GMVH), and this paper was an attempt to model how the effect could come about. It looks to me more like it was retracted for being distasteful to the journal editor's wife.

According to the author and a publisher no scientific criticism has been offered.

Re: University Profs' Criticism Led to Retraction of Math Paper on Gender (2018)

#20

Post by MauranKilom »

r3ctilinear wrote: post #14
jollybean wrote: post #9

Imagine the 'indirect effect' that these kinds of things have on discussions throughout the industry. Reddit just had a discussion about the video 'Fat' (i.e. 'Bad') by Weird Al Mocking Michael Jackson. It 'couldn't be made today' first because it wouldn't even be pitched in the first place - too much risk. They'll try another idea. Maybe it's 'not nice' in 2022 to use the term 'fat' - or, maybe it's not so bad, and…

Weird Al's "Fat" did not mock Michael Jackson. The "Fat" song was a parody which continued on the theme established with "Eat It". Mockery is quite different to parody.

Fun fact: Michael Jackson let them use the original "Beat It" set for "Eat It".
Post reply on HN