Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-06-15 21:24:14 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 011707277CBE3CAE5BD3A9FD4F050FF1424C21680D961A6B6963962601D48850
Participant Details

Original Note:

This article was retracted because "The participants of the survey [did not provide] written informed consent to participate in scholarly research or to have their responses published in a peer reviewed article." "The authors disagree with this retraction." https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02635-1

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1669392399439626245
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 011707277CBE3CAE5BD3A9FD4F050FF1424C21680D961A6B6963962601D48850
  • createdAtMillis - 1686864254235
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1669392399439626245011707277CBE3CAE5BD3A9FD4F050FF1424C21680D961A6B6963962601D48850