The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics
Abstract
Scientists have a choice concerning what role they should play in political debates and policy formation, particularly in terms of how they present their research. This book is about understanding this choice, what considerations are important to think about when deciding, and the consequences of such choices for the individual scientist and the broader scientific enterprise. Rather than prescribing what course of action each scientist ought to take, the book aims to identify a range of options for individual scientists to consider in making their own judgments about how they would like to position themselves in relation to policy and politics. Using examples from a range of scientific controversies and thought-provoking analogies from other walks of life, The Honest Broker challenges us all - scientists, politicians and citizens - to think carefully about how best science can contribute to policy-making and a healthy democracy.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“We posit that only this variant allows the university to function as a (mostly unbiased) clearinghouse for science and for professors to function as honest knowledge brokers (Pielke 2007).”
From Transdisciplinarity: science for and with society in light of the university’s roles and functions (2020) · cites this paper as Pielke 2007
In the citing paper
“But maintaining independence is the prerequisite for facilitators to work as honest knowledge brokers (Pielke 2007).”
From Transdisciplinarity: science for and with society in light of the university’s roles and functions (2020) · cites this paper as Pielke 2007
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,000
Brunet, L., Fochler, M., Müller, R., & Sigl, L. (2025) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-025-09585-z · Cited by 14
The Assessed Arctic: How Monitoring Can Be Silently Normative
Wormbs, N. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17602-4_21 · Cited by 12
Technikfolgenabschätzung und Demokratie
Grünwald, A. (2018) · TATuP - Zeitschrift für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie und Praxis · doi:10.14512/tatup.27.1.40 · Cited by 12
A Theoretical Perspective on the Roles of Political Scientists in Policy Advisory Systems
Brans, M., Timmermans, A. I., & Gouglas, A. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86005-9_2 · Cited by 12
Considering science needs to deliver actionable science
Bisbal, G. A., & Eaton, M. J. (2022) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.14013 · Cited by 12
Leaking the IPCC: A question of responsibility?
Hartz, F. (2022) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.814 · Cited by 12
Bayley, J. E., & Phipps, D. J. (2019) · Emerald Open Research · doi:10.1108/eor-03-2023-0005 · Cited by 12
Čada, K., & Ptáčková, K. (2014) · Policy and Society · doi:10.1016/j.polsoc.2014.05.003 · Cited by 11
Hammer, M., & Hoel, A. H. (2012) · NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives · doi:10.17585/arctic.v3.36 · Cited by 12
“Andresen et al., 2000, and Pielke 2007.”
Intrinsic Motivation and Expert Behavior
Zhu, X., & Zhang, P. (2014) · Administration & Society · doi:10.1177/0095399713519092 · Cited by 12
Scientific advice on the move: the UK mobile phone risk issue as a public experiment
Stilgoe, J. (2016) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/palcomms.2016.28 · Cited by 12
Fahy, D. (2017) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662517732909 · Cited by 12
Crouzat, É., Zawada, M., Grigulis, K., & Lavorel, S. (2019) · Ecosystems and People · doi:10.1080/26395916.2019.1674383 · Cited by 12
“By doing so, we played a role of ‘officers’ at the science-policy interface sensu Pielke (2007) (Crouzat et al. 2018a), and produced instrumental knowledge favoring the inclusion of (environmental) science in governance processes.”
BackgroundGustafsson, K. M. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11236533 · Cited by 12
Radioactive waste management in Croatia - public opinion, legal framework, and policy
Trontl, K., Pevec, D., Jakić, I., & Matijević, M. (2020) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111804 · Cited by 12
Stollorz, V. (2020) · Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz · doi:10.1007/s00103-020-03257-x · Cited by 12
A defense of usable climate mitigation science: how science can contribute to social movements
Drake, H. F., & Henderson, G. L. (2022) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-022-03347-6 · Cited by 11
The role of statisticians in international science policy
Guttorp, P. M. (2011) · Environmetrics · doi:10.1002/env.1109 · Cited by 12
Integrating science, policy and management of rivers: Peter Cullen’s legacy
Lake, P. S., Likens, G. E., & Ryder, D. (2010) · Marine and Freshwater Research · doi:10.1071/mf10082 · Cited by 12
Importing Notions of Governance: Two Examples from the History of Canadian Water Policy
Michaels, S., & de Loë, R. (2010) · The American Review of Canadian Studies · doi:10.1080/02722011.2010.519395 · Cited by 12
Articulating Scientific Practice with PROTEE
Valve, H., & McNally, R. (2012) · Science Technology & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243912451340 · Cited by 12
“When conflicts prevail, science can even do more harm than good (Sarewitz 2004; Pielke 2007), resulting in an unfruitful and frustrating merry-go-round where the same remedy—scientific knowledge—is prescribed as a cure for an ailment which invariably recurs again and again.”
BackgroundStoutenborough, J. W., Bromley‐Trujillo, R., & Vedlitz, A. (2015) · Journal of Public Policy · doi:10.1017/s0143814x15000112 · Cited by 12
Engaging stakeholders in natural resource decision-making
Crawford, B. R., Katz, R. A., & McKay, S. K. (2017) · doi:10.21079/11681/23956 · Cited by 12
Goñi, J. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-04606-4 · Cited by 13
Hee-Je, B., & Kleinman, D. L. (2017) · East Asian Science Technology and Society An International Journal · doi:10.1215/18752160-3827229 · Cited by 11
The Systemic Risk Perspective: Social Perception of Uncertainty and Tipping Points
Renn, O. (2021) · Strategies for sustainability · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-74458-8_2 · Cited by 12
Robertson, A. M. (2022) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2022.831805 · Cited by 11
Computation, data and AI in Anthropocene history
Wickberg, A., & Gärdebo, J. (2023) · History and Technology · doi:10.1080/07341512.2024.2330724 · Cited by 11
Policy learning for policy change on energy efficiency in European companies
von Malmborg, F. (2024) · Energy Efficiency · doi:10.1007/s12053-024-10267-0 · Cited by 14
“Instead of science, the EC tends to lean on consultants such as JRC, Fraunhofer ISI and Ricardo Environment & Energy as problem brokers, translating and interpreting scientific knowledge (Knaggård, 2015; Pielke, 2007).”
Evolving away from the linear model of research: a response to Courchamp et al.
Barot, S., Abbadie, L., Couvet, D., et al. (2015) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.05.005 · Cited by 11
Adding a Community Focus to the Psychological Investigation of Immigration Issues and Policies
Silka, L. (2018) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/josi.12302 · Cited by 11
Tanaka, Y., Chapman, A. J., Tezuka, T., & Sakurai, S. (2020) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101702 · Cited by 11
Stewardson, M. J., Bond, N. R., Brookes, J. D., Capon, S. J., Dyer, F. J., Grace, M., Frazier, P. S., Hart, B. T., Horne, A., King, A. J., et al. (2021) · Australasian Journal of Water Resources · doi:10.1080/13241583.2021.1996681 · Cited by 11
Natural Resource Managers Use and Value Western-Based Science, but Barriers to Access Persist
Piczak, M. L., Kadykalo, A. N., Cooke, S. J., & Young, N. (2021) · Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/s00267-021-01558-8 · Cited by 11
King-Kostelac, A., Gomez, E. A., Finucane, M. M., Gorton, S., Killian, J. L., Walker, K., Bush, J. K., & Smith, J. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2021.787557 · Cited by 14
Scholarly Interest in Forest Fires in Indonesia: A Bibliographical Review
Wulandari, E., Mardiatno, D., Susilastuti, D. H., et al. (2022) · Forest and Society · doi:10.24259/fs.v6i2.21473 · Cited by 11
Hendrix, C. S., Macdonald, J. M., Powers, R., et al. (2023) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s153759272300035x · Cited by 11
How indeterminism shapes ecologists’ contributions to managing socio‐ecological systems
Michaels, S., & Tyre, A. J. (2012) · Conservation Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2012.00241.x · Cited by 12
“Where social indeterminism is high, regardless of the state of natural indeterminism, ecologists should be prepared to have their reasoning dismissed by some advocates and seized upon by others who see its potential to support their positions (Sarewitz 2000; Pielke 2007).”
BackgroundAssessing Conformity of Scientific Voices and Local Needs to Combat Forest Fire in Indonesia
Ekayani, M., Nurrochmat, D. R., Saharjo, B. H., et al. (2015) · Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika (Journal of Tropical Forest Management) · doi:10.7226/jtfm.21.2.83 · Cited by 11
Bressers, D., van Twist, M. J. W., Steen, M. A., et al. (2017) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-55269-3_61 · Cited by 11
Pullman, A., Chen, M. Y., Zou, D., et al. (2018) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/0963662518791902 · Cited by 11
“S&T policy is often crafted with a supportive or oppositional reader in mind (Pielke, 2007); however, as we show, there is a range of ways different groups approach, understand and emphasize S&T in their daily lives.”
BackgroundPost-Normal Science. The Escape of Science: From Truth to Quality?
Karpińska, A. (2018) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2018.1531157 · Cited by 11
“Ultimately, this means that they enter the political arena as ‘ stealth advocates ’ (Pielke 2007), but through the back door of science, to fi nd themselves facing political contestation they did not anticipate.”
Disconnects between Communicated Impact and Ecological Impact of Biological Invasions
Mattingly, K. Z., Pelletier, T. A., Lanterman, J., Frevola, D. M., Stucke, B., Kinney, K. A., Schwartz, R., Spacht, D. E., Dixon, G., & Hovick, S. M. (2020) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biaa003 · Cited by 12
Donadelli, F. (2020) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scaa006 · Cited by 11
Numerato, D., Honová, P. A., & Sedláčková, T. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113916 · Cited by 11
COVID and Climate: Similarities and differences
Grundmann, R. (2021) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.737 · Cited by 13
“Scientists act as commentators in public, sometimes in a role of an open, sometimes of a disguised advocate (Pielke, 2007).”
BackgroundLindenmayer, D. B., & Taylor, C. (2022) · Land · doi:10.3390/land11030407 · Cited by 11
Donà, M. D. (2022) · Journal of International Relations and Development · doi:10.1057/s41268-022-00276-w · Cited by 13
Lehtonen, M. (2012) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781781953525.00020 · Cited by 11
Discursive diversity in introductory environmental studies
Kennedy, E. B., & Ho, J. S. (2015) · Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences · doi:10.1007/s13412-015-0245-9 · Cited by 11
“…debates not only in the context of climate denial, but also as it applies to evaluating possible strategies or energy options (e.g. Kahan 2010; Pielke 2007) – Equip students with frameworks to integrate diverse goals, values, and sources of information into coherent policy agendas (see,…”
BackgroundScience and issue advocacy in a forestry debate in Northern Finland
Sarkki, S., & Karjalainen, T. P. (2012) · The Polar Journal · doi:10.1080/2154896x.2012.679564 · Cited by 11
Brennan, R. E., & Valcic, B. (2012) · Ocean & Coastal Management · doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.02.004 · Cited by 11
Devisscher, T., Vignola, R., Besa, M. C., et al. (2016) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-08988-210448 · Cited by 11
Schmidt, N. M., Teschner, N., & Negev, M. (2018) · Review of Policy Research · doi:10.1111/ropr.12295 · Cited by 12
Dommett, K., & Temple, L. (2019) · Political Studies · doi:10.1177/0032321719844122 · Cited by 14
“…ideas upon participants’ views of experts that, to some extent, reflect existing debates about whether experts should be issue-advocates promoting certain agendas and ideas, or act in ‘purer’ terms by sharing information and acting as a resource for gaining additional information (Pielke, 2007).”
BackgroundA social network perspective on the interaction between policy bubbles
Maor, M. H. (2020) · International Review of Public Policy · doi:10.4000/irpp.774 · Cited by 10
Decoupling knowledge and expertise in personalized medicine: who will fill the gap?
Bowman, D. M., Woodbury, N. W., & Fisher, E. (2016) · Expert Review of Precision Medicine and Drug Development · doi:10.1080/23808993.2016.1199949 · Cited by 11
Knudsen, E. M., & de Bolsée, O. J. (2019) · Geoscience Communication · doi:10.5194/gc-2-83-2019 · Cited by 10
Hoppe, R., & Turnbull, N. (2023) · Public Policy and Administration · doi:10.1177/09520767231177577 · Cited by 13
Trustworthy Science Advice: The Case of Policy Recommendations
Gundersen, T. (2023) · Res Publica · doi:10.1007/s11158-023-09625-z · Cited by 10
Meeting the Growing Need for Land-Water System Modelling to Assess Land Management Actions
Larned, S. T., & Snelder, T. H. (2023) · Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/s00267-023-01894-x · Cited by 12
Chen, G., & Zhang, J. (2023) · Review of Policy Research · doi:10.1111/ropr.12583 · Cited by 10
The challenges experts face during creeping crises: the curse of complacency
Zaman, A. W., Rubin, O., & Staupe‐Delgado, R. (2024) · Policy & Politics · doi:10.1332/03055736y2023d000000017 · Cited by 10
Organizational and Individual Factors of Evidence Informed Policy Making in Public Organizations
Raymaekers, P., Migchelbrink, K., Pattyn, V., & Smedt, P. D. (2025) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13946 · Cited by 24
Academic Activism and the Climate Crisis: Should Scholars Protest?
Fossen, T. (2025) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592725000350 · Cited by 15
Public opinions on biological diversity in Norway: Politics, science, or culture?
Seippel, Ø. N., Marchi, B. D., Garnåsjordet, P. A., & Aslaksen, I. (2012) · Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift - Norwegian Journal of Geography · doi:10.1080/00291951.2012.744091 · Cited by 10
Detecting and Punishing Unconscious Bias
Tetlock, P. E., Mitchell, G., & Anastasopoulos, L. J. (2013) · The Journal of Legal Studies · doi:10.1086/668403 · Cited by 9
Clahsen, S., van Klaveren, H., Vermeire, T. G., KAMP, I. V., Garssen, B. B. G., Piersma, A. H., & Lebret, E. (2019) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2018.1517378 · Cited by 11
“…of experts’ policy advice and the dynamics of scientific discussions in general have been studied extensively (see e.g. Douglas 2000; Elliott 2017; Pielke, 2007; Sarewitz 2004; Spruijt et al. 2014), though we are unaware of studies that specifically identify differences in values at stake in the…”
BackgroundAcknowledging that Science Is Political Is a Prerequisite for Science-Based Policy
Backhaus, T. (2019) · Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management · doi:10.1002/ieam.4140 · Cited by 10
Cradock-Henry, N. A., & Frame, B. (2021) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2021.705229 · Cited by 10
“Assuming the role of the “honest broker” (Pielke, 2007; Sarkki et al., 2020) in scenario development can help navigate the tension between scenario types: what could happen vs. what should happen (Börjeson et al., 2006).”
BackgroundIs there a climate change reporting bias? A case study of English-language news articles, 2017–2022
Brimicombe, C. (2022) · Geoscience Communication · doi:10.5194/gc-5-281-2022 · Cited by 10
“This comes in spite of the discourse around the role of science in both communication and policy spaces (Boykoff and Yulsman, 2013; Pielke, 2007).”
Background100 Important Questions about Bitcoin’s Energy Use and ESG Impacts
Rudd, M. A. (2022) · Challenges · doi:10.3390/challe14010001 · Cited by 10
Biermann, K., Peters, N., & Taddicken, M. (2023) · Media and Communication · doi:10.17645/mac.v11i1.5961 · Cited by 17
Jungblut, J., Gouglas, A., Katz, G., et al. (2023) · European Political Science · doi:10.1057/s41304-023-00440-x · Cited by 10
Anthropocentric Indirect Arguments for Environmental Protection
Elliott, K. C. (2014) · Ethics Policy & Environment · doi:10.1080/21550085.2014.955311 · Cited by 10
Getting to 'No': The method of contested exchange
Castle, D. G. A., & Culver, K. C. (2013) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scs118 · Cited by 10
Hauck, J., Görg, C., Werner, A., Jax, K., Bidoglio, G., Maes, J., Furman, E., & Ratamäki, O. (2014) · Interdisciplinary Science Reviews · doi:10.1179/0308018814z.00000000098 · Cited by 10
Sugar, spice and everything nice: how to end ‘sex testing’ in international athletics
Pielke, R. A. (2017) · International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics · doi:10.1080/19406940.2017.1369448 · Cited by 10
Self-citationKansanga, M. M., Atuoye, K. N., & Luginaah, I. (2017) · African Geographical Review · doi:10.1080/19376812.2017.1415814 · Cited by 11
Floor, J. R., van Koppen, C. S. A., & van Tatenhove, J. P. M. (2018) · Environmental Politics · doi:10.1080/09644016.2018.1546561 · Cited by 10
“This linear model of expertise has become dominant among scientists, policy-makers and advisors (Pielke 2007, Beck 2011) in the field of protected nature areas (Beunen and Duineveld 2010, Turnhout et al. 2015, Floor et al. 2016).”
BackgroundUneke, C. J., Langlois, É. V., Uro-Chukwu, H. C., et al. (2019) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-019-0431-4 · Cited by 10
Thorstensen, E. (2019) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc9030051 · Cited by 10
Bayley, J. E., & Phipps, D. J. (2019) · Emerald Open Research · doi:10.12688/emeraldopenres.13140.1 · Cited by 25
“Values are an important element to knowledge mobilisation and evidence use as articulated by Roger Pielke (Pielke, 2007, chapter 4), and whilst considering power and values the types of impacts arising are important but often overlooked.”
BackgroundWreford, A., Peace, S., Reed, M. S., Bandola‐Gill, J., Low, R., & Cross, A. (2019) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-019-02483-w · Cited by 10
The Behavioral Economics of Biodiversity Conservation Scientists
Vellend, M. (2019) · Philosophical Topics · doi:10.5840/philtopics201947112 · Cited by 10
Genu, M., Gilles, A., Hammond, P. S., Macleod, K., Paillé, J., Paradinas, I., Smout, S., Winship, A. J., & Authier, M. (2021) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.795953 · Cited by 10
Engagement of scientists with the public and policymakers to promote alternative methods
von Aulock, S. (2022) · ALTEX · doi:10.14573/altex.2209261 · Cited by 13
Clark, D. A., Clark, S. G., Dowsley, M., et al. (2010) · ARCTIC · doi:10.14430/arctic660 · Cited by 10
Scientific advocacy: A tool for assessing the risks of engagement
Schmidt, G. A., & Donner, S. D. (2017) · Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists · doi:10.1080/00963402.2017.1364008 · Cited by 10
Knowing when knowledge performs its power in ecological economics
Hukkinen, J. (2019) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106565 · Cited by 9
UK parliamentary select committees: crowdsourcing for evidence-based policy or grandstanding?
The LSE GV314 Group (2020) · Journal of Legislative Studies · doi:10.1080/13572334.2020.1765546 · Cited by 10
Buchs, A., Hassenforder, É., & Meinard, Y. (2020) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.13654 · Cited by 10
“The risk, for a conservationist endorsing such an approach, is to lapse into what Pielke (2007) calls stealth issue advocacy.”
Goodwin, J. M. (2014) · Studies in Logic Grammar and Rhetoric · doi:10.2478/slgr-2014-0003 · Cited by 10
“…include “Data, Interpretation, Advice, Counsel, Advocacy” (Blockstein, 2002, p. 92); reporting , answering questions , evaluating options , advocating (Scott, Rachlow, & Lackey, 2008p. 867, borrowing from Pielke, 2007); and educating , promoting , and ad-vocating (Minnis & Stout McPeake, 2001).”
Science Advice as Procedural Rationality: Reflections on the National Research Council
Feuer, M. J., & Maranto, C. (2010) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-010-9152-0 · Cited by 10
Sluijs, V. D. J., Est, V. Q. R., & Riphagen, M. (2010) · TU/e Research Portal · Cited by 10
Hattingh, J. P. (2010) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781444329988.ch27 · Cited by 11
Leifeld, P., & Schneider, V. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1598196 · Cited by 10
Making government more reflexive : the role of regulatory impact assessment
Hertin, J. (2016) · doi:10.18174/370535 · Cited by 10
The epistemic quality of expert bodies: from normative-theoretical concept to empirical measurement
Holst, C., & Christensen, J. (2023) · Acta Politica · doi:10.1057/s41269-023-00312-8 · Cited by 10
Pe, S., Bergomi, L., Nicora, G., Simonelli, C. A., Kour, P., Diaz, E., Alendal, G., Hernáiz Ferrer, A. I., Corso, V., Bortolotto, C., et al. (2026) · Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · doi:10.3390/make8070216
Metadata
- Authors
- Pielke, Jr.
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2007-04-19
- OpenAlex
- W1527452312
- Cited by
- 2,020
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 112 · 2025: 108 · 2024: 88 · 2023: 96 · 2022: 126 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 119 · 2019: 149 · 2018: 103 · 2017: 129 · 2016: 147 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 146 · 2013: 119 · 2012: 95
- FWCI
- 66.69
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Science and Policy Research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
- Keywords
- science and politics, science and policy, role of scientists, scientific controversy, science communication, democracy, scientific integrity, science and society, public understanding of science
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
