by Summary:
The Economist reports about “outcome switching”—promoting empirical evidence collected in the context of a specific hypothesis test (that didn’t succeed) as support for a different hypothesis. Outcome switching is a good example of the ways in which science can go wrong. This is a hot topic at the moment, with fields from psychology to cancer research going through a “replication crisis”, in which published results evaporate when people try to duplicate them.
Topics:
Dirk Niepelt considers the following as important: Evidence, Hypothesis, Notes, Replication, Replication crisis
This could be interesting, too:
The Economist reports about “outcome switching”—promoting empirical evidence collected in the context of a specific hypothesis test (that didn’t succeed) as support for a different hypothesis. Outcome switching is a good example of the ways in which science can go wrong. This is a hot topic at the moment, with fields from psychology to cancer research going through a “replication crisis”, in which published results evaporate when people try to duplicate them.
Topics:
Dirk Niepelt considers the following as important: Evidence, Hypothesis, Notes, Replication, Replication crisis
This could be interesting, too:
Dirk Niepelt writes “Governments are bigger than ever. They are also more useless”
Dirk Niepelt writes The New Keynesian Model and Reality
Dirk Niepelt writes Urban Roadway in America: Land Value
Dirk Niepelt writes A Financial System Built on Bail-Outs?
The Economist reports about “outcome switching”—promoting empirical evidence collected in the context of a specific hypothesis test (that didn’t succeed) as support for a different hypothesis.
Outcome switching is a good example of the ways in which science can go wrong. This is a hot topic at the moment, with fields from psychology to cancer research going through a “replication crisis”, in which published results evaporate when people try to duplicate them.