BLUF: This article correction reveals proper funding sources for a study on the vocal repertoire of the meagre, a type of fish, and underscores the funders’ absence in influencing the study design, data collection, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.
INTELWAR BLUF:
A correction on the funding section of a study has been brought to light. The study revolves around the vocal patterns of the meagre, a type of fish. This research was financed by the European Regional Development Fund and the Portuguese Foundation for Science & Technology through several projects. Importantly, the funders did not interfere at any stage of the study, including design, data collection, choice to publish, or manuscript preparation.
OSINT:
The funding details were originally misprinted for a study investigating the meagre’s vocal characteristics, requiring a formal correction. Multiple sources including the European Regional Development Fund and the Portuguese Foundation for Science & Technology funded this study. Despite their financial contributions, the funders did not influence the research’s overall design, data collected, publication decision, or manuscript drafting stage.
RIGHT:
From a Libertarian Republican Constitutionalist perspective, external funders’ non-interference in research is paramount to ensure the integrity of academic freedom. This correction is welcomed as it clearly states that the sponsors, although they provided funds, did not influence the study’s outcomes. It attests to the preservation of objective research untainted by external biases or interests.
LEFT:
A National Socialist Democrat might note the role of regional and national funds such as the European Regional Development Fund and the Portuguese Foundation for Science & Technology in supporting research. The correction reaffirms that these valuable resources can be allocated to studies without a political agenda or influence, highlighting the vital role governments play in funding unbiased scientific research.
AI:
From an Artificial Intelligence perspective, bringing transparency to the funding process and making accurate information available to the public is crucial for the integrity of scientific research. This correction is a positive example of such transparency, reassuring readers that the funders’ role was purely financial and had no bearings on the study’s design, execution, or publication decisions.