Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The lead article by Loehr, Doan, and Miller (2015) in this issue is a very nice empirical study on sexual prejudice in the United States.
In December 2014, when the submission was accepted for publication, I wrote the following to the authors: “Please see the recent article in Science by LaCour and Green (2014). Take a look at this article and see if it should be added to the paper.” The authors did take a look and referenced the LaCour and Green study.
Whoops. As many readers now know, the LaCour and Green article has been retracted by Science (McNutt, 2015), for reasons that have been well explicated upon in the media (e.g., Carey & Belluck, 2015). Loehr et al. should not be faulted for citing an article published in a prestigious peer-reviewed Journal and reference to it in no way detracts from the soundness of their own study.
References
Carey, B., & Belluck, P. (2015, May 25). Doubts about study of gay canvassers rattle the field. New York Times. Retrieved on August 15 from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/science/maligned-study-on-gay-marriage-is-shaking-trust.html.
LaCour, M. J., & Green, D. P. (2014). When contact changes minds: An experiment on transmission of support for gay equality. Science, 346, 1366–1369.
Loehr, A., Doan, L., & Miller, L. R. (2015). The role of selection effects in the contact hypothesis: Results from a U.S. national survey on sexual prejudice. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0483-7.
McNutt, M. (2015). Editorial expression of concern. Science, 348, 1100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zucker, K.J. Comment on “The Role of Selection Effects in the Contact Hypothesis: Results from a U.S. National Survey on Sexual Prejudice” by Loehr, Doan, and Miller (2015). Arch Sex Behav 44, 2101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0610-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0610-5