I'm interested in the phenomenon whereby researchers find it more acceptable to omit results from a report (error of omission), or fail to publish a null result, than to make up data (error of commission). Is there an accepted term for this?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @deevybee
Isn't it just motivated reasoning? It is easier to rationalise that some "real" data are not relevant to a report (something wrong with data, design suboptimal, etc) than to rationalise that made up data ARE relevant. To be fair, those decisions have to be made.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey
That doesn't get it. I am specifically interested in the distinction between active vs passive forms of wrongdoing, and how they are perceived differently in moral terms
3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @deevybee @richarddmorey
Like negligent vs intentional torts in common law?
3 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
-
A common question that First-Aid trainers are asked is whether someone who performs first-aid can be sued for doing it wrong, and therefore whether it's safer for the first-aider to do nothing.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Is that so? I had no idea. I was trained and had a certificate [in middle school] and I don't remember this part.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @itjohnstone and
It's not much of an issue in the US because there is legal protection for people trying to help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law …
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Amusingly my middle school is only a few hundred miles from actual Samaria.
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.