Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by neuronic 2943 days ago
The solution is identification of bad methods and subsequent ignorance.

If only we had a metric for credible science that takes authors, institutions, publisher and funding sources into account....

1 comments

This seems like a great idea - is there some reason this doesn't exist?
Something that takes only authors, publishers, and institutions into account sounds counterproductive.

I think it’d be better to have an agreement that only reporducible papers are credible. Ie data the paper is reported on (to include “cleaned” data) and any tools developed (software tools) must always be included. As well as funding for everything disclosed.

Ultimately though I think we may just be seeing the obsolescence of current statistical theory. Science needs hypotheses to be testable in “trustable” metrics. But there are too many loop holes if things like p-hacking are possible.