4 ms·
With, however the caveat that scientific papers can be embarrassingly wrong, and the error can not be spotted for 17 years, and the paper can go on being widely
by folbec 4y ago
With, however the caveat that scientific papers can be embarrassingly wrong, and the error can not be spotted for 17 years, and the paper can go on being widely believed and quoted many years after the full debunk (and the case I link is apparently an honest mistake, not fraud which may be obfuscated).
https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2022/04/08/the-dunning-kruger-effect-is-autocorrelation/ https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2022/04/08/the-dunning-k...
- mgh2 4y agoThat is the nuance of the scientific method in order to advance knowledge: it is not perfect, but the peer reviewed process is rigorous
- folbec 4y agoIn a perfect world, yes. Statistics is a HARD subject, specially when you get a juicy believable story in front of you. And a lack of credit to do confirmation research because for administrators "it is not new". Richard Feynman : We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science. He is overly optimistic, it only works if the "other experimenters" get the money and time to check. A big part of modern science is very expensive, and controls aren't made.