Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-06-21 19:27:27 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 67597687FEA27859324996EED6270595E49DADFE7FFA8D52C6D678B023732C13
Participant Details

Original Note:

The only study making this claim was retracted https://link.springer.com/article/10.1631/jzus.2003.0236

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1804226785523175779
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 67597687FEA27859324996EED6270595E49DADFE7FFA8D52C6D678B023732C13
  • createdAtMillis - 1718998047261
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 180422678552317577967597687FEA27859324996EED6270595E49DADFE7FFA8D52C6D678B023732C13