… that most ordinary people would torture others to death if a guy in a lab coat told them to? But was that true?
Some research is valuable principally for what it tells us about the persons doing and consuming it rather than about its subjects.
By Bayesian standards, 17–25% of social science findings “are probably false,” Johnson thinks, and interestingly, he sees this as a bigger problem than biases and scientific misconduct.
The thing is, this “inconsistent and unreliable” stuff has doubtless been known for some time and only now, in the wake of other scandals, do we hear about it. Peer review, where are YOU?
… just don’t confuse that with getting any better. Here’s a quick summary of the unsolved problems that made psychiatry’s most recent Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-V) so controversial that it may be the last.
According to a journal of the scandal-plagued psychology field, there is a “subterranean war on science” going on.
According to Slate, one of the tested articles producing lower empathy than great books was a Smithsonian piece about the potato … another was about air mice (house sparrows).
It’s one thing for “cool crowd” psychologists to fall on their sword but do they have to do it in public?
Well, on a globe, lots of paths eventually intersect, and what do we see but Dan Graur attacking the positivity study’s lead author, calling her a “well-known crook”and “positivity scoundrel.” My, my.
Unconscious bias? Publish or perish? Both?
When it’s really hard to tell, you have to know there is a problem.
Wilkinson: It’s as if the precision of the statistical analysis is supposed somehow to compensate for, or help us forget, the imprecision of thought at the foundation of the enterprise.
I didn’t say that, but a comprehensive research study by Christopher Silver, a member of the Chatanooga Freethought association. Silver tried to show not all non-believers fit the negative stereotype of “angry, narcissistic, un-agreeable, anti-social dogmatists”, but in the process highlighted the very group that exactly fits that stereotype, namely the anti-theist (or loosely the […]
Like Grandma said, it’s your life, so you need your own supply of good judgement. There is no real way of outsourcing good judgment over the long term. Just more sophisticated levels of self-deception.
Announcement: U.S. National Institute of Mental Health will henceforth ignore all the [psychiatric handbook’s] diagnoses in deciding how to fund research