[benrawk]

I am a social scientist studying human behavior, and this is a huge problem in the field. Myself and my statistician friends who analyze the literature have basically concluded that most extremely "novel" and "surprising" findings in the literature aren't even worth trying to replicate (remember, replications cost money to run, so before you start you have to make some judgment about the likelihood of success.) This is especially true of the "sexiest" sub-topics in the field, like social priming and embodied cognition. If you want to learn more about this, the place to look is Andrew Gelman's blog: http://andrewgelman.com/

[angry-hacker]

Thank you. At first I thought puzzagate?! - I don't need that bs, but this is very different pizzagate.

I once found a good blog about mental health and science, a lot of snakeoil shown about srris, adhd etc. but I'm unable to find it now. Can anyone help me out?

[Fenrisulfr]

Is it thelastpsychiatrist.com ?

[bigboat]

www.slatestarcodex.com ?

[FabHK]

Rolf Degen runs a great and responsive Twitter on results and replication failures in social sciences, not sure he has a blog.

https://twitter.com/DegenRolf

http://retractionwatch.com/2016/08/05/meet-one-of-science-pu...