3 ms·
A sidenote: Using a snappy XKCD is not a valid logical argument even though the poster might think it makes one look hip and cool. I wish researchers were not
by cscurmudgeon 10y ago
A sidenote:
Using a snappy XKCD is not a valid logical argument even though the poster might think it makes one look hip and cool. I wish researchers were not this lazy.
There are at least a handful of valid arguments that one could use rather than an XKCD cartoon.
- darkkindness 10y agoThe argument is that Wansink is responding to criticism (like the XKCD) with an air of indifference. Wansink's response to the XKCD is simply one of the examples; the XKCD itself is not being used to support the author's argument that the act of publishing non-rigorous work is too widespread in quantitative science today.
- cscurmudgeon 10y agoMy point was not about Wasink or the original article. My point its that the XKCD cartoon doesn't convey anything other than snark.
- sideshowb 10y agoThat XKCD cartoon succinctly shows the problem with multiple testing. If every scientific paper were as clear, accurate and impactful as that we would have solved half the issues with science discussed on this comment thread.