4 ms·
For about a year or so now Ive been wanting to make a game about science. It'd basically be a research and discovery simulator, and there would be a free-play m
by swsieber 7y ago
For about a year or so now Ive been wanting to make a game about science. It'd basically be a research and discovery simulator, and there would be a free-play mode. Some of the knobs would be # of required replication, required p-value and how good people are at generating hypothesis.
I think it'd be eye opening.
- marcosdumay 7y agoThere is a "people will mostly replicate/extend articles about X, and ignore articles about Y" (groupthink) effect that I imagine is also very relevant.
- swsieber 7y agoOooh, that's a great one to add to the list!
- jeffhuys 7y agoPlease do. We're getting closer and closer to the tipping point (although it still might be far away) where people go "Oooohhhh... Well, shit.". Where we all realise. Your game would be one of the many catalysers for this. This is my opinion of course, it's not like I have any scientific basis for this.
- heymijo 7y agoI hope you do! I think simulations can be a powerful way to teach/learn and I would like to see this one. I put a reminder to check back with you about this in a few months. Is Keybase your preferred contact method? I know it in name only, but I imagine I can figure it out.
- SilasX 7y agoYes! Riffing off that, I'd want to do a version where all the data in the game is pure randomness, but where your experimental configurations can influence the outcome. (e.g. you can clean the equipment, which alters the reading, or redo experiments that "went wrong") You'd be given a prize/goal for publishable findings. Then you'd gradually introduce enough bias into the experiments to get something publishable, and then get hit with the reveal that "oh you were generating effects from random data, jerk". (Okay, maybe that's overcomplicating it.)