On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 7:24 AM, ERIC P. CHARLES <[email protected]> wrote: [ ... ]
> On a more serious note (and the previous part was fairly serious already): > Given that half the "major discoveries" promoted in psychology are assuredly > garbage, how does this surprise you? Are you a "hard-science" snob, and only > surprised because this is happening to physicists? There are a million > reasons why an initial report of a phenomenon might overestimate the effect > size. Some reasons are malicious (i.e., drug company funded studies as to > the effectiveness of new drugs), others are benign (i.e. sampling error, > unforeseen methodological shortcomings in initial tests, biased acceptance > and promotion of "sexy" results). > > The Neutral Model of Inquiry (or, What Is the Scientific Literature, Chopped Liver?) <http://bactra.org/weblog/698.html> > Whole academic industries arise over non-existent effects: Piaget's > "A-non-B error", menstrual synchrony, and infant's "innate mathematical > abilities." Once the discipline is formed, it is very hard to unform. > > -- rec --
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
