3 ms·
Completely agree. It scares me to dig into research papers and to find very obvious mistakes (anyone at a graduate level is capable of this) and even worse to s
by aaron-lebo 9y ago
Completely agree. It scares me to dig into research papers and to find very obvious mistakes (anyone at a graduate level is capable of this) and even worse to see how heavily seasoned some of the horrific datasets are.
This kind of stuff despite those flaws gets propagated without much skepticism. It makes me wonder how much stuff we "know" to be true is the result of an intuitive argument but has no real support.
- icelancer 9y ago>>It scares me to dig into research papers and to find very obvious mistakes (anyone at a graduate level is capable of this) and even worse to see how heavily seasoned some of the horrific datasets are. It is scary, and you are right, but you can do your part by blogging about it. Doesn't have to be official, just post the text and your notes. The more people do this, the more we have informal peer-review and replication checking after the fact, and at least a loosely-connected database of blogs and articles will exist when people search the article title.
- claytonjy 9y agoSay it louder! As a very interested non-scientist layperson, I have learned so much through blog posts critical of poor papers, which I often find through twitter. The more people doing that, the better the state of the field becomes, faster. It's fascinating to see the "new guard" emerging in psychology, actively acknowledging the poor practices that have preceded them and fighting back were possible.