We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this chapter, I want to take a close look at two distinct but related phenomena in the humanities, each of which marks a stark contrast with the natural sciences for reasons that are not altogether clear. The first involves a recent episode in which several deliberately nonsensical articles were published as part of an effort to expose a certain family of humanities disciplines as intellectually hollow. I will argue that the general phenomenon it illustrates does in fact represent a serious problem in the humanities. The second phenomena is the general absence of article retraction in the humanities. Retraction plays an important epistemic role in science. Now, why is the retraction rate in the humanities holding steady at around 0%? Is this cause for celebration, cause for concern, or an insignificant byproduct of the fundamental difference between scientific knowledge and humanistic knowledge?
This chapter demonstrates the influential role of printed books in defining Chaucer’s canon and the implications of that newly formed canon for older books. It considers a series of texts which early modern readers added to manuscripts (and some early printed books) to update and improve them: short poems including Prophecy, Words to Adam, and Bon counsail; Robert Henryson’s Testament of Cresseid; various Plowman-themed texts; the Tale of Gamelyn; and the Retraction. The chapter argues that print made available an array of genuine and apocryphal works which readers could extract, assemble, and reconfigure in line with their own tastes and understanding of the Chaucer canon. The evidence collected in the chapter shows the persistence of particular narratives about Chaucer’s works which were promoted in print: that he was a poet of fin amour, that he condemned Criseyde to a wretched death, that he assigned his Plowman an anticlerical tale, and that the Retraction was a later monkish forgery. The changeability of the manuscript books chronicled in this chapter reflects a concurrent reshaping of Chaucer’s reputation in the period and the variability of his literary canon itself.
Why are prominent news media retractions so rare? Using data from a survey experiment in which respondents view simulated Twitter newsfeeds, we demonstrate the dilemma facing news organizations that have published false information. Encouragingly, media retractions are effective at informing the public – they increase the accuracy of news consumers’ beliefs about the retracted reporting more than information from third parties questioning the original reporting or even the combination of the two. However, trust in the news outlet declines after a retraction, though this effect is small both substantively and in standardized terms relative to the increase in belief accuracy. This reputational damage persists even if the outlet issues a retraction before a third party questions the story. In a social media environment that frequently subjects reporting to intense scrutiny, the journalistic mission of news organizations to inform the public will increasingly conflict with organizational incentives to avoid admitting error.
Consider the quasi-variety generated by a finite algebra and assume that yields a natural duality on based on which is optimal modulo endomorphisms. We shoe that, provided satisfies certain minimality conditions, we can transfer this duality to a natural duality on based on , which is also optimal modulo endormorphisms, for any finite algebra in that has a subalgebra isomorphic to .
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.