3 ms·
Because it creates a conflict of interest, where their income depends on the continued significance and validity of their research results. And when a research
by rendaw 4y ago
Because it creates a conflict of interest, where their income depends on the continued significance and validity of their research results.
And when a researcher this fanatically believes in their own research, were they properly free of biases going into the research? Is writing the book the consequence of amazing research results, or did they plan to write the book from the start (maybe seeing it as the only way to make investment into the research worthwhile)?
- yreg 4y agoThe conflict of interest is always there since almost any scientist wants to discover something and be right. That doesn't mean everyone does bad science, but it's not possible to be unbiased. I'd say the motivation to name a phenomenon and make a mark in the science history might be much higher and more widespread then to sell a book. Science cannot depend on scientists being unbiased about their work. It has to depend on verification, reproduction of experiments, meta analysis and so on.
- svnt 4y agoScientists are likely to be assessed on the basis of their general credibility, not the standing of a single paper. Maintaining general credibility typically requires not overstating your claims, especially when dealing with sparse data. Publishing a single paper and then making money on promoting lifestyle changes based on your discovery is not science, and would be (I would say correctly) side-eyed by many scientists. The author’s credibility is now inexorably bound up with a single statement that has been reduced to marketing.