Agree with #2. But people please quit reinforcing inaccurate stereotypes. There is **zero** evidence that there’s more “worthless drivel” in gender studies than anywhere else.https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/1052766924621279232 …
-
-
Replying to @erinhengel
Out of curiosity, what sort of evidence would allow us to compare the amounts of drivel across fields with diverse methods, purposes, and domains of applicability?
6 replies 3 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion
I can’t think of any existing evidence that would allow us to compare fields. But a large scale Sokal^2 across a large number of fields (including economics!) obviously would
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erinhengel
Hmm...I think it might indicate the relevant *potential* for drivel, but perhaps not the *realized* drivel... But in any case, did you think that the failure of Sokal^2 to publish any papers in sociology journals suggests soc is more drivel-resistant?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion
When the researchers produced actual crap their papers were universally rejected. It’s only when they started fabricating data (and and really understanding the relevant literature) that their papers were accepted.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erinhengel @Noahpinion
Anyway, this would be hard to catch in any discipline. I suspect sociology journals are probably just more conservative (& that’s why they universally rejected the papers). Accepting a paper about dog rape is a pretty risky strategy.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @erinhengel
How would we know how much a paper about dog rape ultimately pays off? Citation count? Some other objective measure of value?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion @erinhengel
And, if hoaxing across fields is the way to assess the relative fractions of drivel, but risk aversion (however payoff is measured...?) results in resilience to drivel, then we must then assume a loss function for drivel... :-)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion
Sure. But there’s probably also a big reward for publishing crazy stuff that *isn’t* drivel. That is, I presume, why newer edgier fields still establishing their legitimacy are publishing it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @erinhengel @Noahpinion
The difficulty is determining ex ante whether a paper is drivel or isn’t.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I think it's very difficult ex post!
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.