4 ms·

The worst part of these kind of studies and I include sociology and psychology studies is that they are often used to create policy in the private or public sec

The worst part of these kind of studies and I include sociology and psychology studies is that they are often used to create policy in the private or public sector causing untold damage to organizations, employers and citizens.

ethanbond 3y ago
How else should we create policies if not “conduct research, design policy around what we believe we know?” Of course if “these kind of studies” refers to fraudulent ones, then yeah no one would disagree.
- lockhouse 3y ago
  The issue is that policy is being established based on studies that are either very badly designed or in many cases outright fraudulent, often with devastating consequences. Like many things, research is often spoiled by human nature. Researchers want to prove their hypothesis so desperately that they’re willing to do whatever it takes to make that hypothesis true. Perverse incentives are everywhere in the research world.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Through the democratic process?
  - staticman2 3y ago
    I didn't realize voters were not allowed to read studies.
    - edgyquant 3y ago
      Nobody said anything if the sort. The point is a lot of these “studies” are not reproducible (or in this case literally made up.). So what it does it matter if the average voter reads then? How about we stop trying to force “policies” on a population who doesn’t care about them and using unscientific studies to convince them they need it. I’m sure you’ll have a snarky remark to this, in which case don’t bother.
      - ethanbond 3y ago
        It's unclear if you're saying "listen to the good studies, don't listen to the bad studies" with no explanation as to how we separate the two ex ante, or you're just saying "don't make policies based on scientific understanding", or you're just saying don't make policies. None of these is actually a viable approach to, well, anything.
      - staticman2 3y ago
        "Nobody said anything if the sort." If you are genuinely confused about my reply, I suggest you reread the post you responded to and then reread your own post, focusing on what you were saying in the context of the post you responded to.
- th230603 3y ago
  Arguably there is huge demand for this sort of research which is a proximate cause of it being concocted fraudulently. Lots of people working in policy don't have any real ethical or political engagement with the problems they are supposed to be solving. They lack vision and purpose. They choose to believe that irrelevant and trivial interventions can make huge inroads into difficult social problems, because they are like the man looking for his wallet under the lamppost. If making progress on really difficult problems requires deep thought, courageous leadership and persistent hard work, then they aren't going to be able to solve them anyway.
- bedobi 3y ago
  What actually happens is orgs, be they for profit or governments or whatever, decide what they want to do, look for studies that justify it after the fact (in social science, you can find a study to support anything), and point to the studies despite many of them not even passing a basic smell test.
motohagiography 3y ago
In the public sector, studies like these are the pretexts for unpopular policies for minority interests. Science seems like an obviously good way to balance minority and majority interests, but when studies become a forcing function for narrow political interests, the results have been equally as obvious. When you have the power of the state, what do you need truth for? There are a number of third-rail studies that are doubtful and even implausible but they underpin policy, so they are sacred relics of progress for which the punishment for questioning them is exile. The social sciences are largely irreproducable, and our socities tolerate it because they give the bureaucracy the tools it needs to manage the legislative branches in a form of capture. Show me a study that demonstrates an official narrative is baseless, and I'll show you "a problematic fringe theory from a now-former academic."

ethanbond 3y ago

How else should we create policies if not “conduct research, design policy around what we believe we know?” Of course if “these kind of studies” refers to fraudulent ones, then yeah no one would disagree.

lockhouse 3y ago
The issue is that policy is being established based on studies that are either very badly designed or in many cases outright fraudulent, often with devastating consequences. Like many things, research is often spoiled by human nature. Researchers want to prove their hypothesis so desperately that they’re willing to do whatever it takes to make that hypothesis true. Perverse incentives are everywhere in the research world.
edgyquant 3y ago
Through the democratic process?
- staticman2 3y ago
  I didn't realize voters were not allowed to read studies.
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    Nobody said anything if the sort. The point is a lot of these “studies” are not reproducible (or in this case literally made up.). So what it does it matter if the average voter reads then? How about we stop trying to force “policies” on a population who doesn’t care about them and using unscientific studies to convince them they need it. I’m sure you’ll have a snarky remark to this, in which case don’t bother.
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      It's unclear if you're saying "listen to the good studies, don't listen to the bad studies" with no explanation as to how we separate the two ex ante, or you're just saying "don't make policies based on scientific understanding", or you're just saying don't make policies. None of these is actually a viable approach to, well, anything.
    - staticman2 3y ago
      "Nobody said anything if the sort." If you are genuinely confused about my reply, I suggest you reread the post you responded to and then reread your own post, focusing on what you were saying in the context of the post you responded to.
th230603 3y ago
Arguably there is huge demand for this sort of research which is a proximate cause of it being concocted fraudulently. Lots of people working in policy don't have any real ethical or political engagement with the problems they are supposed to be solving. They lack vision and purpose. They choose to believe that irrelevant and trivial interventions can make huge inroads into difficult social problems, because they are like the man looking for his wallet under the lamppost. If making progress on really difficult problems requires deep thought, courageous leadership and persistent hard work, then they aren't going to be able to solve them anyway.
bedobi 3y ago
What actually happens is orgs, be they for profit or governments or whatever, decide what they want to do, look for studies that justify it after the fact (in social science, you can find a study to support anything), and point to the studies despite many of them not even passing a basic smell test.

motohagiography 3y ago

In the public sector, studies like these are the pretexts for unpopular policies for minority interests. Science seems like an obviously good way to balance minority and majority interests, but when studies become a forcing function for narrow political interests, the results have been equally as obvious. When you have the power of the state, what do you need truth for? There are a number of third-rail studies that are doubtful and even implausible but they underpin policy, so they are sacred relics of progress for which the punishment for questioning them is exile. The social sciences are largely irreproducable, and our socities tolerate it because they give the bureaucracy the tools it needs to manage the legislative branches in a form of capture. Show me a study that demonstrates an official narrative is baseless, and I'll show you "a problematic fringe theory from a now-former academic."