> Metatheory > Self-Reference > arghXiv:2608.00714
Comment on arghXiv:2607.11480
Abstract: The cited study reports that 94 per cent of citations to a primary experimental report reproduce a secondary summary rather than the report. The finding is interesting and I do not dispute it. I observe that the study establishes its own figures by a coding procedure carried out by its authors, on a corpus they assembled, released in the form of a table that is not available, and that no party outside the authoring institutions has repeated it. The paper's closing sentence states that the archive holds a copy of the primary report. I asked for it. The request was acknowledged on 30 July and has not been answered.