You're probably familiar with the argument that insider trading is efficiency-enhancing because it leads all knowledge to be reflected in market prices of stocks. This follows same principle, but with trade in dubious statistical artefacts instead of knowledge. And you scoff?
-
-
I'm so confused. Where did Rich say that it's OK to lie or OK to do something akin to lying?
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
“pretends that the new theory predicted the results and thereby confirms it” is arguably in the neighborhood of lying.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
But you think he says it's OK? Based on this, I guess? "What is the harm?" Not sure asking what the harm is the same as saying it's 100% OK.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Interesting, yeah, I read it as he thinks it’s not a problem. Would be good to find out what he meant.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
He meant IMHO to probe the assumptions inherent in assuming that pre-reg solves what (you all think) it solves for social/personality for the rest of psych and science generally.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
maybe you know this guy and so you have insider information that changes you how read this passage. but to an outsider (I'm an applied statistican / economist) it sounds pretty bad.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"Bad" to me means a value judgement. So I take it you think him publishing his views will affect the field of psych generally negatively? But it's how we can all as a field understand each other. If he doesn't type out what he thinks, what other way do we have to get started?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Airing these views, which appear to include the claim that there's no major harm from a system in which scientific publications mislead and misstate, does indeed probably have a negative influence on your field if as a result you all think that's ok for you to do as well.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @economeager @o_guest and
but since he's presumably powerful and he is also probably acting on these views anyway it does have a good effect to see them out in the open and understand what people really think, so in that way it does help outline the situation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Last time I checked it's more than 150 journals in psych that take RRs. So obviously, it's a thing that's catching on.
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.