A little mini-thread about the grievance studies hoax, responding to concerns from @ConceptualJames that the emphasis of my initial set of responses may have been in someway misplacedhttps://twitter.com/briandavidearp/status/1056611677251272706 …
-
-
The paper re Stapel seems to suggest that Stapel's publications are evidence of a problem, and one that might be identified and corrected for. Prima facie a similar attitude seems reasonable re GS hoax. 1/2
-
One approach. Break down issues as external (e.g. faking data, misreporting/omitting data, etc) or internal (p-hacking, biased/bad arguments, lack of intelligibility, etc.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Good for him. Let's clean that bullshit up.
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.