Bad Science

[AshG]

The "publish or perish" system has created an environment where you are incentivized to either fudge your data, or research things that you already know to be true. I've yet to see a journal that is interested in insignificant findings, and very rarely are they interested in replication studies. This means that if we think something is true, and research shows it to not be true, journals aren't interested. This also means we must accept the findings of previous research, because a study trying to replicate those previous findings will not be accepted. Therefore, it is a waste of time to do either.

And this is why I and many others have gone the Professor of Practice route. I'm judged on my teaching, not on my output of word salad.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

What do you call the person who graduated last from medical school? Doctor.

Yes, that is one thing you can call them. I agree.

 

[deezvols]

Back to the OP

Video on the subject matter. By Grandvol and pete buttigieg's boys.



P-hacking. Seems like they through in extra variables and weed out the ones that hurt their certainty.

Seen that a lot with the Covid stuff that comes out. Like the NC school mask experiment, where they didnt even alter the mask usage between test subjects. They controlled for other items, but attribute the success to one, masks.

Which is why no one should blindly accept the results of research. Unfortunately, many people aren't able to read research and properly come to a conclusion, yet another weakness of the scientific field.