I see: in the case that a paper is read, deciding a paper sounds iffy and deciding not to cite it would correlate strongly with deciding not to cite a paper with wrong conclusions.

I was considering that scientists rarely check the conclusions of the papers they cite by reading them, but just decide based on writing and other signals whether the source is credible. So a well-written paper with a wrong conclusion could get continued citations. But indeed, if the paper is written carefully and the methodology convincing, it would be less likely that the conclusion is wrong.