4 ms·

I disagree, insofar in that qualitative social science is ineffective. It's effective. Nobody listens. The fallacy of "general management" means that general

by urthor 5y ago

I disagree, insofar in that qualitative social science is ineffective. It's effective. Nobody listens. The fallacy of "general management" means that general managers, who have a background in finance and cost/benefit, are not receptive to the idea that deep knowledge is extremely involved in leadership and decision making. Because then they'd be out of a job.

xyzzyz 5y ago
If evidence we obtain from social sciences is so effective, why are they suffering from deep and wide reaching replication crisis?
- urthor 5y ago
  It's more of a case that bad science was made, rather than "this type of science is bad." Toyota and GM have had widespread vehicle recalls in recent types. I wouldn't put that down to "4 wheeled transportation devices being intrinsically bad."
  - fartboi 5y ago
  - HPsquared 5y ago
    It depends how deep and far-reaching it is. Cars in the 60s caused smog and used leaded fuel, so they were all pretty bad at the same time. Perhaps the field needs a similar size of transition as the change to unleaded (too many "leading questions" perhaps).
- rocqua 5y ago
  If people start publishing faked physics papers, does that mean physics is no longer an effective source for engineering?
barry-cotter 5y ago
> I disagree, insofar in that qualitative social science is ineffective. > It's effective. Nobody listens. This is exaggerated but in the right direction. Consider A/B testing. We know that works. We know how. It’s been a big deal for well over a decade. And it’s still not standard. There are large, profitable companies that sell direct to consumers that don’t do it who would reliably, predictably get a 10% bump in profits off of doing it. But it does grow. Selling things on the internet isn’t as competitive as highly liquid, transparent financial markets but people do pick up $100 bills lying on the street eventually.

by urthor 5y ago

xyzzyz 5y ago

If evidence we obtain from social sciences is so effective, why are they suffering from deep and wide reaching replication crisis?

urthor 5y ago
It's more of a case that bad science was made, rather than "this type of science is bad." Toyota and GM have had widespread vehicle recalls in recent types. I wouldn't put that down to "4 wheeled transportation devices being intrinsically bad."
- fartboi 5y ago
- HPsquared 5y ago
  It depends how deep and far-reaching it is. Cars in the 60s caused smog and used leaded fuel, so they were all pretty bad at the same time. Perhaps the field needs a similar size of transition as the change to unleaded (too many "leading questions" perhaps).
rocqua 5y ago
If people start publishing faked physics papers, does that mean physics is no longer an effective source for engineering?

barry-cotter 5y ago

> I disagree, insofar in that qualitative social science is ineffective. > It's effective. Nobody listens. This is exaggerated but in the right direction. Consider A/B testing. We know that works. We know how. It’s been a big deal for well over a decade. And it’s still not standard. There are large, profitable companies that sell direct to consumers that don’t do it who would reliably, predictably get a 10% bump in profits off of doing it. But it does grow. Selling things on the internet isn’t as competitive as highly liquid, transparent financial markets but people do pick up $100 bills lying on the street eventually.