3 ms·
It's a bit trickier than the title says. By a "false" finding, they mean "a finding fails to yield the same result in at least one other study." But there's not
by anton_tarasenko 12y ago
It's a bit trickier than the title says. By a "false" finding, they mean "a finding fails to yield the same result in at least one other study." But there's nothing wrong with failing a replication. See cancer risk factors research papers: they regularly yield results with opposite signs.
Rather, we should talk about "more research is needed to get a representative sample of studies of a phenomena."
- gwern 12y ago> See cancer risk factors research papers: they regularly yield results with opposite signs. You'll have to expand on that - when I think of 'cancer risk factors', I think of data-dredging epidemiological analyses which are predictably wrong by the logic of hypothesis-testing, or I think of biochemical studies which blatantly overfit by failing to cross-validate or keep holdout samples, and lack of replication seems like it has the usual meaning.