• sazey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    7 months ago

    Like most published research isn’t unreproducible horseshit mostly there because of name dropping or dollars.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      Fwiw the reproducibility crisis isn’t because of “horseshit” science. There are a few examples of that for sure. But the vast majority of it is just good science that happens to be wrong. The scientific method doesn’t mean the wrong conclusion can be drawn, especially when for budgetary reasons sample sizes are relatively limited, or when the effect size being studied is small, or there are too many confounding variables.

      That’s not a mark against the studies though. It’s just a mark in favour of attempting to reproduce studies and giving good funding to attempts to do so. And perhaps a mark against using one-off studies with small effect sizes to shape public policy or health advice.

      • sazey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        My critique was not aimed at the scientific method itself nor at constraints faced by researchers. I was aiming more towards the sneering attitude that published research is the only valid method of drawing a conclusion, especially at the person level.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          One published paper is not a valid method of drawing a conclusion. Studying references, citations and related papers is.