l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Science magazine retracts study on voters' gay-rights views
By DAVID CRARY | May 28, 2015 | 3:55 PM EDT
NEW YORK (AP) — Science magazine on Thursday formally retracted a highly
publicized article about a study gauging the ability of openly gay
canvassers to shift voters' views toward support for same-sex marriage.
One of the authors of the article, Columbia University political science
professor Donald Green, had requested the retraction on May 19, saying his
co-author, Michael LaCour, had been unable to produce the raw data that was
used in the study.
Science magazine, after its own investigation, said it decided to proceed
with the retraction even though LaCour — a graduate assistant at the
University of California, Los Angeles — did not agree with that decision.
Science said it based the retraction on misrepresentation of cash incentives
for survey participants, false statements about financial sponsorship of
the survey, and the inability to produce original data, "which makes it
impossible to verify or alleviate concerns about statistical irregularities."
LaCour did not respond immediately to an email from The Associated Press,
and his phone number was not taking messages.
On his website was this message: "I will supply a definitive response on or
before May 29, 2015. I appreciate your patience, as I gather evidence and
relevant information."
The article in Science received widespread news coverage when it appeared in
December, including articles by The Associated Press, The New York Times
and the Washington Post.
The article detailed a study which concluded that openly gay canvassers were
far more effective than straight canvassers in shifting voters' views
toward support for same-sex marriage.
According to the article, opinion changes produced by the straight
canvassers tended to fade within a few weeks and those voters reverted to
their previous views less favorable to same-sex marriage. The article said
that the changes produced by the gay canvassers persisted nine months later.
Green began to have misgivings about the study after the integrity of the
data was called into question by two graduate students at the University of
California, Berkeley, who tried to launch a similar study.
"I am deeply embarrassed by this turn of events and apologize to the editors
, reviewer, and readers of Science," Green wrote last week.
Reasons for Thursday's retraction were detailed as follows by Science
magazine:
—"Survey incentives were misrepresented. To encourage participation in the
survey, respondents were claimed to have been given cash payments to enroll,
to refer family and friends, and to complete multiple surveys. In
correspondence received from Michael J. LaCour's attorney, he confirmed that
no such payments were made."
—"The statement on sponsorship was false. In the report, LaCour
acknowledged funding from the Williams Institute, the Ford Foundation, and
the Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund. Per correspondence from LaCour's
attorney, this statement was not true."
—"LaCour has not produced the original survey data from which someone else
could independently confirm the validity of the reported findings." |
|
