Doesn't p hacking constitute an "honest error" & author saying they p hacked is "clear evidence"? http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf …
-
-
Replying to @richarddmorey @o_guest
want? Retract? What is self-report effect is reliable, which is also in these papers? Partial retract?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Only argue that retraction *should* be on the table for cases like this. Arg. that this should be retracted is for others.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey @o_guest
You are free to retract anything you want. Expecting or asking for it requires very good reasons.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey
OK. So we retract 5.000.000 papers where the Type 1 error rate was not controlled. And then? Start anew?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Sounds good to me! I'm glad we're agreed on that :)
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @richarddmorey @o_guest
I'm just glad you care so much about Type 1 error rates :)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @lakens @richarddmorey
LOL how did we go from a single person admitting they are wrong in a single pub to 5,000,000 papers being retracted?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey
Almost everything that is not pre-registered is p-hacked to some extent.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
That's a very strong philosophical position that actually plays little role here where the authors explicitly admit.
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.