Another misconception about p-curve. It can detect p-hacking and it can show that there was no p-hacking. Z-curve tells a different story. Evidence is way way too good to be true.https://replicationindex.wordpress.com/2018/04/04/on-power-posing-power-analysis-publication-bias-peer-review-p-curve-pepsi-porsche-and-why-psychologists-hate-zcurve/ …
-
It is like saying, there is no evidence of fraud. Also true, even if there is massive evidence for the use of QRPs which could include fraud, we just don't know. One could also say, nobody was killed which is also true, when QRPs are used heavily.
Evidence of QRT of which fraud is a subtype is evidence for fraud too, just non-specific.
-
-
Well it becomes so political that I typically do not include fraud / data manipulation / fabrication in QRPs. Accordingly, I assume that researchers worked really hard to p-hack real data to significance.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.