As it should be for all journals. All. Journals.https://twitter.com/PsychScience/status/953675782429331456 …
-
Replicability sometimes approaches a Platonic ideal -- the point is that researchers should use such rigor that anyone else *would have* gotten similar results if they repeated the study (even if *in fact* it is impossible for anyone else to actually repeat the study).
In cases where field samples are consumed and likely irreplaceable, this seems like the right kind of thing: to aspire to (and, where possible, to insist on) significantly higher standards than if the samples were easy to come by. Of course, those standards may later look low.
-
-
Exactly so. Same is true for some biomedical research that depends on, say, blood draws that are used up if you analyze them. Maybe standards should be correspondingly higher in those cases -- if you can only do it once, better get it right the first time.
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.