Yue Liu, Scientific Accountability: The Case for Personal Responsibility in Academic Error Correction, Qeios, Preprint, 2025, https://doi.org/10.32388/M4GGKZ
Liu, Yue, The Necessity of Error: Why Mistakes Are the Essential Nutrients for Scientific Progress (November 13, 2025). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5744422 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5744422
Liu, Yue, The Inevitability and Necessity of Error in Scientific Publishing: Why Publishing Incorrect Articles Is Not Catastrophic (September 15, 2025). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5491906 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5491906
In science, mistakes are inevitable. We are all human, and errors happen. Yet, there is a critical distinction between an occasional misstep and a repeated, uncorrected mistake. As the saying goes: “A mistake repeated more than once is a decision. A mistake repeated more than twice is a habit. A mistake repeated more than three times is character.”
Applied to the scientific world, these words carry a sobering warning. When researchers or institutions repeatedly defend an erroneous theory or method, ignoring evidence that challenges it, the mistake transcends error—it becomes a defining trait of the system itself.
The refusal to acknowledge and correct mistakes has consequences far beyond academic pride. It slows innovation, misguides new generations of scientists, and, ultimately, erodes public trust in science. What could have been an opportunity for learning and progress becomes an entrenched barrier. The habit of repeating mistakes, when left unchecked, morphs into institutional character—a culture resistant to self-reflection and change.
Science thrives not because humans are infallible, but because humans are willing to confront their fallibility. Breakthroughs often arise from recognizing and correcting errors, even those long assumed to be “settled truths.” When the scientific community collectively resists this principle, it risks turning curiosity into conformity, and rigor into ritual.
Acknowledging mistakes is not a weakness; it is the cornerstone of intellectual integrity. A culture that embraces correction ensures that knowledge progresses, rather than stagnates, under the weight of repeated errors. The question every scientist and institution must ask is simple but profound: are we learning from our mistakes, or are we defining ourselves by them?
In the end, the refusal to correct is more than an error—it is a choice, a habit, and, ultimately, a reflection of character. Science must remain vigilant against this tendency, lest it forget that its greatest strength lies not in never erring, but in its unwavering commitment to self-correction.
(00:00:02):
A mistake repeated more than once is a decision.
(00:00:04):
A mistake repeated more than twice is a habit.
(00:00:06):
A mistake repeated more than three times is character.
(00:00:09):
Mistakes happen.
(00:00:10):
We’re all human.
(00:00:11):
But a mistake that is constantly repeated isn’t a mistake anymore.
(00:00:15):
It’s part of who you really are.
