The blog RetractionWatch investigates accusations of problematic papers across scholarly disciplines and tracks superlatives like most retractions and retractions for Nobel Prize Winners.
Posts are published daily on issues ranging from plagiarism, fraud, conflicts of interest, errors, and misconduct more generally.
Take it from an academic like me that peer review in just over a month is rare and a sign of low-quality editorial work at the journal (the exceptions would be the most open, progressive journals like PCI and similar).
The formatting/style and peer review history alone are enough for me to doubt this. Of course, the other users' points about study design and lack of transparency make it even harder to trust the claims.
They're blue because computer scientist Ben Schneiderman made them blue using research from 1985:
" In 1985, a group of students at the University of Maryland, mentored by computer science professor Ben Shneiderman , conducted a series of experiments to study the impact of different hyperlink colors on user experience. They were eager to determine which color would be the most effective in terms of visibility and readability.
The experiments revealed interesting findings. While red highlighting made the links more noticeable, it negatively affected users' ability to read and comprehend the surrounding text. On the other hand, blue emerged as the clear winner. It was dark enough to be visible against a white background and light enough to stand out on a black background. Most importantly, it did not interfere with users' retention of the text's context."
Mozille should really do better research before posting histories like this. It's easy to overlook the impact of academic research in tech.
I solved my RSI with rest, a vertical mouse, and ZSA Moonlanders. I eventually bought one for home use and one for work use with great performance for the past four years. I can’t imagine going back, especially after replacing the key switches to quieter variants.
The split keyboard opens up the middle of my desk to fit an adjustable stand (Parblo and ElevationLab work well). So I can write and draw by hand if I want.
Sorry, but other academic researchers who have analyzed Langer’s work have found many problems invalidating her claims. These studies have not been independently reproduced and are ludicrous: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/10/19/carroll-la...
I would like to point out for context that the author, Jordan Lasker, is a eugenist derided for shoddy science, falsely using university affiliations, and racist commentary.
I do not write this to contradict particular claims in the article above, but @cremieux should be read cautiously.
Yes, a numerate population as assessed by national averages matters. A more numerate population reasons better about economic policies and may vote more wisely. Numeracy is closely tied to the ability to work in a variety of occupations. If we consider probability and statistics, the implications are especially salient.
Posts are published daily on issues ranging from plagiarism, fraud, conflicts of interest, errors, and misconduct more generally.
https://retractionwatch.com/