Five years ago, I suggested systematically Sokaling all peer-reviewed journals. To “Sokal” is, hereby, to attempt to publish clearly bogus papers to illustrate the brokenness of the academic publication process.https://twitter.com/Meaningness/status/307083846556471297 …
-
Show this thread
-
David Chapman Retweeted Areo
Today @HPluckrose,@ConceptualJames &@peterboghossian reported on the first multiple-Sokaling. They were successful in publishing nonsense in top-ranked journals (which comes as no surprise, but is great to have verified).https://twitter.com/AreoMagazine/status/1047292046073950208 …David Chapman added,
2 replies 9 retweets 68 likesShow this thread -
I had in mind a more ambitious project. Pointing out that “grievance studies” fields are mostly nonsense is shooting fish in a barrel. We know that, for instance, “cognitive neuroscience” is also largely bollocks: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/08/25/071530 …pic.twitter.com/mKE8wMuJ9X
4 replies 20 retweets 96 likesShow this thread -
-
Replying to @OortCloudAtlas
I was unsurprised by this. My late sister was the Chair of the neuroscience program at UC Davis. She complained for decades that most work in the field was simply not true (or so shoddy as to be meaningless, not-even-false).
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas
In an unrelated Twitter thread someone has just suggested that the whole Chicago school of economics output from 1970 onwards was a Skokal-style hoax with a long fuse.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
I think many researchers, and many fields, semi-know they are spewing utter nonsense, but find ways to rationalize it. Macroeconomics is one. They know it is bogus but say, well, it gives some metaphorical insight anyway.
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.