Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by irjustin 1041 days ago
mmmmm why? seems like a bad thing to dismiss?
2 comments

Replication crisis. Worth websearching and being aware of how bad it has been on just this kind of research.
But this says nothing about the quality of this particular article.
There's a metric ship-ton of research papers produced every year. Set your prior on which ones you read. This research paper /could/ be high quality, but given the sheer amount of incredible BS that has been published using very similar methods I am setting my prior accordingly. Feel free to try and replicate it yourself, or wait for someone else to do it if you set yours differently.

There's insufficient contempt for psychology and sociology academics who pretend this incredible witch-doctory screw-up with so many BS un-retracted papers fitting a curve to noise and booking a ted talk hasn't happened and everything is ok. Huge kudos to these ~270 authors [1,2] who took it on and got data. They found some good research that reproduced too, just a lot less than you'd expect, like or be remotely comfortable with.

  [1] https://osf.io/ezcuj/
  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility_Project
There seems to be a lot of issues around replication of these kinds of studies - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology) - see the section on Replicability controversy