Comments on: Fix Science In Half An Hour http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/ In a mad world, all blogging is psychiatry blogging Fri, 24 Jul 2015 19:34:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3 By: Welcome To Replication Lab! | Random Nuclear Strikes http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42665 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 23:04:20 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42665 […] agree this should be Mythbusters’ new direction. And yes, John Ioannidis would be […]

Report comment

]]> By: suntzuanime http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42664 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:58:55 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42664 I think the lower-hanging fruit might be to get people who run game-shows to turn them into economics experiments. These shows are things that already exist, giving away sizable cash awards, and yet economics experiments are often criticized because the amount of money in question is too low to really motivate the participants. I know there was a show Golden Balls that had a memorable treatment of the Prisoner’s Dilemma, but I’d like to see more stuff like that.

Report comment

]]> By: DSimon http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42655 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:13:55 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42655 Iron Scientist!

The secret ingredient for today’s competition is: math.

Report comment

]]> By: Eli http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42607 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:54:59 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42607 Yeah, I think it would be much simpler to just allocate some amount of journal publications and some amount of grant funding strictly to replications and null results.

Report comment

]]> By: Bruno Coelho http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42594 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 07:47:35 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42594 Besides jokes, a incentive system for replication probably would do more good than the attitude ‘trying to be original’.

Report comment

]]> By: Jinnayah http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42562 Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:51:42 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42562 Replicating Milgram as reality TV was done in 2011. Per href=”http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/touch-of-evil-eli-roth-recreates-infamous-experiments-for-discovery-channel/”>NYTimes ArtsBeat weblog post: “Spoiler alert: the modern version wasn’t any more encouraging.”

It was done in 2007 more scientifically & with published results, also funded by a television network.

Milgram’s results seem to hold up fairly well, all things considered. A lot of psychologists aren’t so lucky even with re-doing their own experiments.

Anything to get replication more “air time” would be great, though: “reputable” journals aren’t much interested in them. Daryl Bem says replication of his — sensational — findings of precognition would be pretty key to finding any meaning whatsoever, yet the replications have trouble getting any thanks or publication for it. (Ben Goldacre: “[The next study team] submitted their negative results to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, which published Bem’s paper last year, and the journal rejected their paper out of hand. We never, they explained, publish studies that replicate other work.”

Report comment

]]> By: Jai http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42538 Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:20:39 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42538 Hypothesis: Comments per article are inversely logarithmically proportional to the level of meta the post operates at.

A post which about discourse responding to a critique of the worldview underlying a previous post will generate ~500 comments; a post about how comments should would will generate ~100 comments; An object-level idea post will generate ~20 comments.

Report comment

]]> By: JPH http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42514 Wed, 26 Feb 2014 19:26:19 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42514 Yes. More science as reality tv please.

Report comment

]]> By: Alejandro http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42508 Wed, 26 Feb 2014 18:42:19 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42508 This would give a huge incentive to the second researcher to cheat and make sure somehow that they get a null result. The only way to make sure there is no cheat is to have someone else design the protocol and carefully supervise the experiment. But then why give the huge reward to a researcher who has not been really in control of the research?

Report comment

]]> By: Avantika http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/25/fix-science-in-half-an-hour/#comment-42451 Wed, 26 Feb 2014 14:13:14 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=1614#comment-42451 It certainly would, but that may not always be a good thing. Failure to replicate does not by itself mean the original study is wrong.

I work in a biology lab and I sometimes fail to replicate other people’s results after copying them carefully, but I don’t think that means the original authors were cheating or even especially careless. It would take a lot more evidence to make me think that.

I don’t know anything about psychology experiments, but I imagine there would be even more factors that are outside the researchers’ control.

Report comment

]]>