I've read through this paper a couple times and started looking at its data.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06767-1
I'm predicting it now before I get further into reviewing this: this paper is wrong for all the reasons you'd suspect and isn't going to hold up to any scrutiny.
But managers and non-scientists everywhere are going to use it to reign in remote workers and say that it's "supported by the science".
After reviewing "Remote collaboration fuses fewer breakthrough ideas" more thoroughly, I believe it should be retracted. Here is a write-up of why this is the case:
I can summarize the problems with this paper as follows:
1. Confounded relationships between the explanatory and response variables that are not properly adjusted for,
2. Ill-defined response variable that is insufficiently explored and whose quantitative value does not match the interpretation the authors suggest,
3. Large amounts of data with NaNs that are not discussed,
4. A large dataset with most of its variance contained in < 1% of the overall data,
...
@jrhawley your point about cultural and language barriers was one of the best points in your critique.
My reading of your critique leads me to think that having an experienced humanities researcher in the team (ie. Increased diversity) would have helped.
What also would have helped would have been discussing it with researchers who are highly marginalised who are forced to do remote collaborations.
@rowlandm Completely agree. Involving domain area experts from the beginning would eliminate so many of these problems.
And you're right, the unequal impact of a paper like this on marginalized communities is so important. It is way too easy to see bad logic extending from this:
1. We need in-person work to be disruptive
2. Marginalized people need remote work to contribute fully to the workplace
3. Thus, we cannot have disabled and marginalized people on our team if we want to be disruptive
@rowlandm Is remote work perfect? No. Is it great for everyone? Also no. Are there major benefits to remote work? Yes! Let's figure out what and how they work.
I'm probably preaching to the choir, here, but just like curb cuts, remote work has huge benefits for disabled and non-disabled people, alike.
- live-transcription of talks for deaf people
- stable working conditions for new parents
- the ability to avoid bad weather and risky travel conditions
- reduced carbon emissions from commuting
James Hawley, PhD
RM