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 Budgetary Effects of Ageing and Climate Policies in Switzerland
Dirk Niepelt writes SNB Annual Report
Dirk Niepelt writes Banks and Privacy, U.S. vs Canada
Dirk Niepelt writes Bank of England CBDC Academic Advisory Group
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.