Reference health
Controversies in Science
36/36 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-09
Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.
23 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
The 36 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1007/s11191-010-9312-5
The Role of Historical-Philosophical Controversies in Teaching Sciences: The Debate Between Biot and Ampère
resolves10.1007/978-1-4020-6596-5_20
Knowledge and Epistemological Beliefs: An Intimate but Complicate Relationship
resolves10.1080/09500690600802213
Historical Controversy as an Educational Tool: Evaluating elements of a teaching–learning sequence conducted with the text “Dialogue on the Ways that Vision Operates”
resolves10.3102/0091732X07309371
Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals
resolves10.1007/s11191-017-9876-4
Understanding the Nature of Science Through a Critical and Reflective Analysis of the Controversy Between Pasteur and Liebig on Fermentation
resolves10.1080/09500693.2015.1043598
Beyond Construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science
resolves10.1177/0963662509348863
Emotional anchoring and objectification in the media reporting on climate change
resolves10.1080/02635140903513565
Authentic student inquiry: the mismatch between the intended curriculum and the student‐experienced curriculum
resolves10.1177/0963662512440219
When climate science became climate politics: British media representations of climate change in 1988
resolves10.1002/sce.1011
Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues
resolves10.1080/09500690600560753
Towards a Theoretical Framework for Teaching Controversial Socio‐scientific Issues
resolves10.1080/14926156.2015.1119336
Social Representations of High School Students About Mathematics Assessment
resolves10.1088/0031-9120/37/1/308
Improving learning by discussing controversies in 20th century physics
resolves10.1007/s11191-004-4664-3
The Oil Drop Experiment: Do Physical Chemistry Textbooks Refer to its Controversial Nature?
resolves10.1080/09500690010006518
Pupils' views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study
resolves10.3200/SATS.44.2.113-117
Data Do Not Speak for Themselves: The Role of Data in Scientific Controversies
resolves10.1080/095006999290345
Cognitive acceleration through science education II: its effects and scope
resolves10.1007/s10668-009-9189-0
Northeastern Brazilian students’ representations of Atlantic Forest fragments
resolves10.1177/0963662512440913
How the public engages with global warming: A social representations approach
resolves10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60175-4
Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children
resolves10.1177/0963662509102694
Diving in magma: how to explore controversies with actor-network theory
resolves10.1177/0306312712469855
Marginalization processes in science: The controversy about the theory of relativity in the 1920s
resolves10.1111/1467-9752.12282
Thinking Controversially: The Psychological Condition for Teaching Controversial Issues
resolves10.1177/0963662507077512
Staging scientific controversies: a gallery test on science museums' interactivity
The 23 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedBall, P. (2017). The group 3 dilemma, Chemistry World https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/the-group-3-dilemma/3007080.article . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedBritish Educational Research Association [BERA] (2018) Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research, fourth edition, London. https://www.bera.ac.uk/researchers-resources/publications/ethicalguidelines-for-educational-research-2018 . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedCartwright, S. (2018). Superluminal neutrinos: an OPERA in three acts. https://www.stx.ox.ac.uk/physics-controversies-past-and-present-happ-centre-dr-susan-cartwright . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedDepartment for Education (2013). Statutory guidance national curriculum in England: science programmes of study https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-science-programmes-of-study . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedDepartment for Education (2016).Qualifications reform: resources for teachers. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/qualifications-reform-resources-for-teachers . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedDuschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
no DOI — not checkedEdelson, D. C. (1997). Realising authentic science learning through the adaptation of scientific practice. In K. Tobin & B. Fraser (Eds.), International handbook of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
no DOI — not checkedFirestein, S. (2012). Ignorance: how it drives science. New York: OUP.
no DOI — not checkedHenry, J. (2002). The scientific revolution and the origins of modern science (2nd ed., Studies in European history (Basingstoke, England)). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
no DOI — not checkedJones, A. (2007). The valuing of technology in the science curriculum: biotechnology as an example. In: Corrigan, D. Dillon, J. & Gunstone, R. (Eds.), The Re-Emergence of Values in Science Education, Ch. 7. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
no DOI — not checkedLatour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
no DOI — not checkedLefevre, F., & Lefevre, A. M. C. (2014). Discourse of the collective subject: social representatons and communication interventions. Text content Nursing, Florianopolis, 23(2), 502–507.
no DOI — not checkedLevinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001). Valuable lessons. London: The Wellcome Trust.
no DOI — not checkedMcLaughlin, T. (2003). Teaching controversial issues in citizenship education. In A. Lockyer, B. Crick, & J. Annette (Eds.), Education for democratic citizenship (pp. 149–160). Aldershot: Ashgate.
no DOI — not checkedMcMullin, E. (1987). Scientific controversy and its termination. In H. T. Engelhardt Jr., H. T. Engelhardt, & A. L. Caplan (Eds.), Scientific controversies: case studies in the resolution and closure of disputes in science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
no DOI — not checkedMeyer, M. (2009). From ‘cold’ science to ‘hot’ research: the texture of controversy. CSI Working Papers Series. Series 016, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
no DOI — not checkedMoscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change (European monographs in social psychology ; 10). London: Published in cooperation with European Association of Experimental Social Psychology by Academic Press.
no DOI — not checkedMoscovici, S., & Duveen, G. (2000). Social representations: explorations in social psychology. Cambridge: Polity P.
no DOI — not checkedScerri, E. (2012). Trouble in the periodic table. Education in Chemistry, 49(1), 13–17.
no DOI — not checkedScerri, E. (2016). A tale of seven scientists and a new philosophy of science. New York: Oxford University Press.
no DOI — not checkedSilva-Costa, A., Araújo, M. M., Nagai, R., & Fischer, F. M. (2010). Environmental and organizational conditions for napping during night work: a qualitative study among nursing professionals. Sleep Science, 3(1), 11–15.
no DOI — not checkedWagner, W., Farr, R., Jovchelovitch, S, Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., Marková, I., Duveen, G. and Rose, D. (1999). Theory and method of social representations [online]. London: LSE Research Online. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/2640 . Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
no DOI — not checkedZiman, J. (1994). The rationale of STS education is in the approach. In J. Solomon & G. Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: international perspectives on reform (pp. 21–31). New York: Teachers College Press.
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-08-09 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11191-019-00048-y"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11191-019-00048-y/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11191-019-00048-y)