@article{ref1,
title="The continuing vitality of bias in research on guns and violence: a second "non-response response" to unfounded critiques",
journal="Justice quarterly",
year="2021",
author="Fridel, Emma E.",
volume="38",
number="5",
pages="955-960",
abstract="ABTRACTFollowing Kleck's critique on my recent article on guns, firearms homicide, and mass shootings, I wrote a detailed and thorough reply refuting his methodological concerns and discussing directions for future research. In response, Kleck published a second rebuttal reiterating issues already addressed in both the original manuscript and the reply article, erroneously dismissing my work as a &quot;non-response response&quot; that is &quot;destructive of the ends of scholarship.&quot; Here, I respond to Kleck's two critiques not discussed at length previously before highlighting the perils of confirmation bias and the politicization of science.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0741-8825",
doi="10.1080/07418825.2021.1930109",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2021.1930109"
}