Apr. 20th, 2016

ymarkov: (Face)
...things only came to a head last year with the publication of a paper in Science. It described a major effort to replicate 100 psychology experiments published in top journals. The success rate was little more than a third. People began to talk of a “crisis” in psychology.

In fact, the problem extends far beyond psychology – dubious results are alarmingly common in many fields of science. Worryingly, they seem to be especially shaky in areas that have a direct bearing on human well-being – the science underpinning everyday political, economic and healthcare decisions. No wonder the whistle-blowers are urgently trying to investigate why it’s happening, how big the problem is and what can be done to fix it.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23030690-500-why-so-much-science-research-is-flawed-and-what-to-do-about-it/

There is no one single cause for the increase in nonreproducible findings in so many fields. One key problem is that the types of research most likely to make it from lab benches into leading scientific journals are those containing flashy never-before-reported results. Such findings are often too good to check. [...] In 2014, the Cardiff University neuroscientist Christopher Chambers and his colleagues starkly outlined what they think is wrong. They noted that the gold standards for science are rigor, reproducibility, and transparency. But the academic career model has undermined those standards by instead emphasizing the production of striking results.
http://reason.com/archives/2016/01/19/broken-science

From here.

Profile

ymarkov: (Default)
Yisroel Markov

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15 161718192021
2223 24 25262728
29 30     

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 5th, 2025 05:30 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios