Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.med.psychobiology    |    Dialog and news in psychiatry and psycho    |    4,734 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,716 of 4,734    |
|    =?UTF-8?B?4oqZ77y/4oqZ?= to All    |
|    Many Psychology Findings Not as Strong a    |
|    28 Aug 15 09:07:55    |
      From: bulldog23x@gmail.com              The New York Times                     Many Psychology Findings Not as Strong as Claimed, Study Says                     From left, members of the Reproducibility Project, an assessment study of 100       published psychology papers: Johanna Cohoon, Mallory Kidwell, Courtney       Soderbergh and Brian Nosek.       ANDREW SHURTLEFF FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES       By BENEDICT CAREY       AUGUST 27, 2015       The past several years have been bruising ones for the credibility of the       social sciences. A star social psychologist was caught fabricating data,       leading to more than 50 retracted papers. A top journal published a study       supporting the existence of ESP        that was widely criticized. The journal Science pulled a political science       paper on the effect of gay canvassers on voters' behavior because of concerns       about faked data.              Now, a painstaking yearslong effort to reproduce 100 studies published in       three leading psychology journals has found that more than half of the       findings did not hold up when retested. The analysis was done by research       psychologists, many of whom        volunteered their time to double-check what they considered important work.       Their conclusions, reported Thursday in the journal Science, have confirmed       the worst fears of scientists who have long worried that the field needed a       strong correction.              The vetted studies were considered part of the core knowledge by which       scientists understand the dynamics of personality, relationships, learning and       memory. Therapists and educators rely on such findings to help guide       decisions, and the fact that so        many of the studies were called into question could sow doubt in the       scientific underpinnings of their work.              "I think we knew or suspected that the literature had problems, but to see it       so clearly, on such a large scale -- it's unprecedented," said Jelte Wicherts,       an associate professor in the department of methodology and statistics at       Tilburg University in        the Netherlands.              RELATED COVERAGE       Science, Now Under Scrutiny Itself JUN 15, 2015       Show Full Article                       http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/science/many-social-science       findings-not-as-strong-as-claimed-study-says.html?referrer=              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca