- Reaction score
- 13
- Points
- 530
When a New Study Debunks Science, Don't Ignore It
A recent fracas over a psychology experiment helps illustrate how social science is broken -- and how to fix it.
I fail to see why there would be any objection to the updated findings being published. If the original study was science/news-worthy enough to publish, then just as any other subject study, any related legitimate findings, research, experiments etc that are gathered as time progresses, whether in support or against the original, should be brought forward equally. That’s how knowledge and awareness increases, right?
More at link:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/scientific-credibility-harmed-when-experiments-fail-to-replicate
A recent fracas over a psychology experiment helps illustrate how social science is broken -- and how to fix it.
...In 2008, Science, one of the top scientific journals, published a paper by a group of psychologists that claimed to find biological differences between liberals and conservatives...Fast forward a decade, though, and the claim is unraveling. In a working paper published this month, another team of psychologists attempted to repeat the experiment, and also conducted other similar experiments. They failed to find any evidence linking physical-threat perception with political ideology. But when they tried to publish their paper, Science desk-rejected it -- that is, the editors refused to even send the paper out for peer review, claiming that the replication study simply wasn’t noteworthy enough to be published in a top journal. Meanwhile, another team of researchers also recently tried to replicate the original study, and failed. So even though at this point the evidence proving a biological basis for liberalism and conservatism seems to have been invalidated, it’s unclear whether this fact will make it into the public conversation...
I fail to see why there would be any objection to the updated findings being published. If the original study was science/news-worthy enough to publish, then just as any other subject study, any related legitimate findings, research, experiments etc that are gathered as time progresses, whether in support or against the original, should be brought forward equally. That’s how knowledge and awareness increases, right?
More at link:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/scientific-credibility-harmed-when-experiments-fail-to-replicate