also to say preregistration compatible with all types of theory testing/phil of sci is not actually philosophically accurate
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
prereg = a philosophical position just like anything and the phil of sci needs to be thought out for it just like with anything
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
severe testing of hypotheses with or without pre reg can actually achieve a lot of what we want. But ppl won't do it
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
severity in the Mayo sense
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
so it's kinda like Poppers use: test with a highly probability of detecting genuine effects but not non genuine
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ed_berry @annemscheel
link me! Sounds like some phil of sci I'd be interested in reading about - I'm not a Popperian though.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @ed_berry @annemscheel
food is for the week
also thanks - I await with eagerness.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel
well the pain book is 'Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge', though there's a new one coming out >
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
oooh Deborah G. Mayo is Mayo - Thanks! I can now google around.
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.
