Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-12 02:18:48 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D9576870BFE5212F6CB37AD99134E01CBC04BC18B09346ABEDCC90BC45E8CF68
Participant Details

Original Note:

The graph fails to include a link to the public study, making it impossible to evaluate the methodology, sampling, or data collection processes. Consequently the graph isn't fully aligned with the actual claim. As such, no counter-argument is necessary for its rejection. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25303/reproducibility-and-replicability-in-science

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1822779243496947760
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - D9576870BFE5212F6CB37AD99134E01CBC04BC18B09346ABEDCC90BC45E8CF68
  • createdAtMillis - 1723429128389
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1822779243496947760D9576870BFE5212F6CB37AD99134E01CBC04BC18B09346ABEDCC90BC45E8CF68