Yeah, after the influential Ioannidis article there was an attempt to replicate the results of the 100 most-cited psych papers
-
-
I think ~75?% didn't replicate? Many were famously bogus theories, like priming and implicit bias, but I can't rattle them off
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
well, if indeterminacy & observer effect applies to subatomic particles, I have no doubt that it applies 10000x in psychology
-
They had some more basic problems...
-
it seems to me that many physicists could not explain what they mean by 'matter' or 'energy' or 'atom'...
-
well, there are some psychologists who do interesting research on 'mechanics' without really grasping full human context
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.