The one-sided and unsubstantiated retraction of Discover Education’s most successful article (by editor Prof. Kerry Kennedy)

Publication, reception, poster at the APS convention 2023 in Washington

In May 2024, I published an article in Discover Education about the often astonishingly low results of developing countries in student achievement and intelligence test studies:

Rindermann, H. (2024). Surprisingly low results from studies on cognitive ability in developing countries: Are the results credible? Discover Education, 3(1), 55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00135-5 the original article can be found here: www.researchgate.net/publication/380754429

The article was accepted in round 2 after the standard review process with two reviewers and a “minor revision”. The only notable feature was that the author was given just five days for revision. I then gave myself a week to respond to the three-page review with a six-page reply letter and several important changes to the manuscript.

I had also addressed the same research question in a poster for the APS 2023 Annual Convention, Washington, May 25-28, 2023:

Rindermann, H. (2023). Astonishingly low results of cognitive ability studies in developing countries: Are the results credible? Poster for APS-Convention 2023 in Washington, 25–28 May 2023.

There were some interesting and stimulating discussions on this topic at the conference during the presentation.

According to a metric provided by the publisher (Altmetric), the published article (Rindermann, Surprisingly low results ... Discover Education) is the most frequently read article in the journal of a similar age (24 thousand accesses, June 14, 2025; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44217-024-00135-5/metrics). Among all articles in all journals, it ranks 97^th (on a scale from 0 to a maximum of 100). This represents an exceptionally high level of reception, interest and success.

Subject of the article: What is it about?

For decades, internationally comparative student achievement studies such as TIMSS, PISA, and PIRLS have observed low scores in developing countries. The differences to leading countries are up to four standard deviations, for example in TIMSS Science 2011 grade 4 between Yemen (209 points) and South Korea (587 points). These studies use a scale with a mean in developed countries of 500 and a standard deviation of 100. Converted to an IQ scale (mean 100, standard deviation 15), the values in Yemen and South Korea represent an IQ of 56 and 113. That is a difference of 57 IQ points or, expressed in school years (assuming an increase of 35 student achievement scale points per year), a difference of 11 years of schooling. As if Koreans in fourth grade had gone to school 11 years longer than fourth graders in Yemen!

To verify the validity of student achievement test results, one can first compare them with other student achievement tests (e.g., PISA with TIMSS) or one can compare the summarizing collections of other authors with each other (e.g. that of the World Bank with that of Eric Hanushek or mine). Despite different scales such as reading or math and different linking methods, the results are roughly the same everywhere.

Student achievement study results can then be compared with other tests of cognitive ability – intelligence tests. Although these are not collected as systematically as student achievement tests, the results show similar patterns (for example, the IQ in South Africa is 79, while in China it is 105 – a difference of 26 IQ points).

However, both approaches operate within the conventional testing paradigm. To break away from this paradigm, one can take variables that are highly correlated with international test differences and use them to predict cognitive test scores in countries (statistical prediction via regression equation). The pattern remains stable, but the differences between countries are somewhat reduced.

Nevertheless, we still remain within the framework of tests, figures and statistics. Ultimately, the decisive criterion of validity is people’s everyday thoughts and actions. On average, do higher scores indicate more intelligent, rational and reasonable thinking and behavior, and likewise, do lower test scores indicate less intelligent behavior? If this were not the case, test results would only be test results and would have nothing to do with reality. To do this, one must qualitatively examine and analyze people’s thoughts and actions. This is possible through descriptions of thought processes observed in everyday life, but only in smaller samples compared to tests. However, one can also draw on reports from other authors, for example, on the behavior of teachers (who are crucial for the cognitive development of the younger generation). Here, too, supportive findings emerge. Some grotesque examples are also made public, such as teachers who aren’t even present in schools or math teachers who can’t add two-digit numbers.

The summary and original article can be found here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44217-024-00135-5; www.researchgate.net/publication/380754429

Retraction of the publication by Discover Education (by editor Prof. Kerry Kennedy)

In September 2024, Discover Education “retracted” the contribution.. See: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44217-024-00259-8

“The Editor-in-Chief has retracted this article. After publication, concerns were raised about the methodology and dataset used in this research. Independent post-publication peer review has confirmed fundamental flaws in the use of student assessment studies as a measure of IQ or cognitive ability, and in the prominence of individual examples taken from the author’s life. The author Heiner Rindermann disagrees with this retraction.”

No response from the editor, Prof. Kerry Kennedy, no provision of reviews, no possibility to respond to possible criticism, no refund

Despite of several requests from me, I have not received the post-publication peer reviews. Maybe they don’t exist, maybe they are just invented. My arguments were not considered or refuted. I was not given the opportunity to respond to possible criticism. The editor-in-chief, Prof. Kerry Kennedy, never responded to my emails. Furthermore, the publication fees charged by Springer were not refunded. Springer (Publishing Management, Customer Service) never responded to my emails either (except for confirmation emails).

No response from the editor, Prof. Kerry Kennedy, even to letters from professional associations

The editor-in-chief, Prof. Kerry Kennedy, did not respond to an email from the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR). He did not address the request to make the alleged peer reviews available or to publish them. Nor did he respond to the request to give the author an opportunity to rebut the criticisms or to submit a revised version addressing the subsequently raised concerns. The criticism that the withdrawal of the publication by Discover Education constitutes a breach of the COPE standards (see below) was also not refuted.

Exactly the same thing happened in response to a letter and request from the German Society for Psychology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie, DGPs): No reply was received from the editor-in-chief, Prof. Kerry Kennedy; the alleged reviews were not provided, nor was the requested opportunity to respond to the criticism granted.

Violation of COPE standards

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is an organization that provides guidelines on integrity and standards in scientific publishing. There are precise guidelines as to when the retraction of a publication is justified: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/retraction-guidelines:

“clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation), … plagiarism … have previously been published elsewhere … data without authorisation for use … Copyright has been infringed … reports unethical research … manipulated peer review process … failed to disclose a major competing interest” (COPE, 2019, p. 2)

None of this was blamed on the article or the author. The retraction is therefore not in accordance with the COPE guidelines for retraction (e. g., “major error”, “fabrication of data”, “plagiarism”). The COPE guidelines also explicitly emphasize that retractions are not appropriate if

“The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns”. (COPE, 2019, p. 3)

The retraction clearly contradicts the COPE guidelines.

Media reaction

Three authors in two German media outlets have taken a critical look at the retraction, including the most important German daily newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung:

Meins, W. (2024, September 21). Wissenschafts-Journalismus: Jetzt kommen die Putztruppen. Forschungsergebnisse mögen falsch sein, heftig umstritten oder unerwünscht – das ist nichts Neues und wurde bislang gut ausgehalten. Jetzt sollen sie aus dem Schrifttum gelöscht werden – und zwar auch posthum. Ein irrer Akt der Säuberung. [Science journalism: Here come the clean-up crews. Research findings may be wrong, highly controversial or undesirable – this is nothing new and has been tolerated well up to now. Now they are to be deleted from the literature – even posthumously. A crazy act of cleansing.] Achse des Guten. www.achgut.com/artikel/wissenschafts_journalismus_jetzt_kommen_die_putztruppen

Lövenich, Ch. (2024, September 27). Ausgestoßene der Woche: Kompetenz. [Outcast of the week: Competence.] Achse des Guten. www.achgut.com/artikel/ausgestossene_der_woche_kompetenz

Thiel, Th. (2025, January 8). Vermintes Gelände. Ein wissenschaftlicher Aufsatz, der ein niedriges Intelligenzniveau in Entwicklungsländern feststellt, wird gegen den Willen des Autors zurückgezogen. Zu Recht? [Mined terrain. A scientific article that establishes a low level of intelligence in developing countries is withdrawn against the will of the author. Rightly so?] Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Retrieved from https://zeitung.faz.net/faz/geisteswissenschaften/2025-01-08/5310a1be86bb26b135e962e48aa5361a/?GEPC=s5, www.faz.net/aktuell/karriere-hochschule/rueckzug-einer-studie-ueber-intelligenzniveau-in-entwicklungslaendern-110214974.html

One of the critical authors, Prof. Dr. med. Dipl.-Psych. Wolfgang Meins, is a neuropsychologist, geriatrician and associate professor of psychiatry. As early as June 2020, Prof. Meins was the first psychiatrist worldwide to conclude – based on a careful behavioral analysis – that US President Joe Biden (still a candidate at this time) was exhibiting early signs of dementia, nearly five years before the topic began appearing in the media this year (22 June 2020, www.achgut.com/artikel/ist_us_praesidentschaftskandidat_joe_biden_dement).

Summary and evaluation

Discover Education respectively the editor Prof. Kerry Kennedy started

– after successful reviews,

– after acceptance of a manuscript,

– after payment of the publication fees

– and after publication

a second review process, “post-publication peer review”,

– without making the results of this second review available,

– without giving the author the opportunity to counter-argue or correct (in case there were any errors)

– and without any new information that was not already available at the time of submission,

– and the publication was retracted.

Evidence for “fundamental flaws” or “author error or misconduct” (which would otherwise lead to retractions) is not present or is not provided or stated. There are also no allegations of plagiarism or fraud, which in the past have led to the withdrawal of other publications in science. The results just don’t seem to suit Prof. Kennedy. Differing positions in science are common and – if they lead to a rational, argumentative debate – are good for the advancement of knowledge. The eradication of other positions, however, is a sign of totalitarian thinking and criminal ideologies.

The editor of the journal, Prof. Kerry Kennedy, never seems to have looked at the work during the publication process, there was never a response to emails and suggestions, e.g. disclosure of reasons, publication of “post-publication peer reviews” and a scholarly response, initiating a discussion that clarifies and advances research. Editor Kerry Kennedy’s handling of the matter suggests a lack of professional competence and ethical responsibility. Moreover, the retention of the charged fees, despite the circumstances, raises concerns of potential fraud.

The entire affair places Springer Publishing in a negative light. Springer was an outstanding German scientific publisher at the beginning of the 20^th century. Scientific greats such as Karl Jaspers (psychiatrist, psychologist and philosopher) and Viktor von Weizsäcker (founder of psychosomatic medicine) published with Springer. I can still remember how I reverently picked up the precious old volumes in the attic of my grandfather, Dr. med. Joseph Rindermann. What has become of Springer today?

In January 2024, I received a letter from the Springer editor for educational psychology, school and educational psychology, Wiebke Würdemann. The letter, written in German, contained three errors, namely in the form of address of a professor, in the capitalization at the beginning of the letter and in the greeting at the end. What was once considered the epitome of German excellence in science and education can no longer produce even a flawless letter. Springer embodies Idiocracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy) – not as a distant dystopia, but as our present reality.

Further information, documented letters to Discover Education

Rindermann, H. (2024, May 27). Letter to associate publisher Discover journals. ResearchGate, www.researchgate.net/publication/381025123

Rindermann, H. (2024, September 7). Letter to Discover Education regarding retraction of “Surprisingly low results ...” article. ResearchGate, www.researchgate.net/publication/384324009

Rindermann, H. (2024, September 20). Comment on the retraction of the article “Surprisingly low results ...” by Discover Education. ResearchGate, www.researchgate.net/publication/384324296, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17804.73600

An interview about the study on YouTube:

Matthews, L. & Rindermann, H. (2024, June 3). Yes, some countries have low IQs. Channel Lipton Matthews. www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvK_gjUZMg8 & www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY5bYwFmYeo