Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-03 22:07:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: BE4F1964BE776040FE2BDFE20B098B74141B27EAD0FAB113EB38094BC4D05DE9
Participant Details

Original Note:

Ese estudio es pseudociencia. Los datos no respaldan las conclusiones, la muestra es pequeña y no significativa, y recurre a la falacia non sequitur, es decir, hay más hipótesis al hecho supuestamente observado que la que concluyen sus autoras. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(l%C3%B3gica)

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1841876022083400149
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - BE4F1964BE776040FE2BDFE20B098B74141B27EAD0FAB113EB38094BC4D05DE9
  • createdAtMillis - 1727993252291
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 1
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1841876022083400149BE4F1964BE776040FE2BDFE20B098B74141B27EAD0FAB113EB38094BC4D05DE9