4 ms·
Oh, we definitely understand number 4 now. All scientists and researchers should be aware of the observer-expectancy effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obser
by m104 17y ago
Oh, we definitely understand number 4 now. All scientists and researchers should be aware of the observer-expectancy effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer-expectancy_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer-expectancy_effect
Wikipedia also briefly covers the debunking of the Belfast homeopathy results: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory#Subsequent_research http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory#Subsequent_researc...
- whatusername 17y agoBut that still takes number 4 into #1 territory (Placebo effect). It's good to know that homeopathy is pretty much bunk as expected though - thanks for those links! I was rather confused when I first saw this article.
- m104 17y agoFrom the perspective of the patients in this type of research and "treatment," I think you are correct. Looking at the effect on science and knowledge as a whole, however, the observer-expectancy effect is quite damaging and is not a mystery at all. This team (and many other teams) of unfortunate researchers got caught up in a belief system that skewed their results. Ironically, the more skeptical one is of a particular belief, the deeper in love one will fall with it when it appears to be correct.