If authors admit having used p-hacking/QRPs which invalidate conclusions of a published study, what should happen to the article?
-
-
Replying to @annemscheel
I'm struck by the courage of authors like Carney considering strong incentive to not disclose such beliefs.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @morgantear @annemscheel
is is really courage when you are powerful and covering your ass though? Like this seems way more like spin to me.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
It was going to come out sooner or later.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @morgantear
Do you really think that? I believe there are just enough Fiskes out there for a happily-ever-after without ever >
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
> having to admit any sort of wrongdoing. Alternative: Say you lost faith in effect but only refer to sampling error.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @annemscheel @o_guest
I think it’s definitely more courageous the farther down the hierarchy you go.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @morgantear @o_guest
Yes and no. On the top end you're most responsible and might be held accountable eg. by funders&administration, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @annemscheel @morgantear
you think the institution which probably hired her off the back of TED talk and other fame will reevaluate her?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Cuddy did the TED talk, not Carney.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
still loads of leverage & prestige imho
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @TunnelOfFire and
I'm sure the hiring committee based some of their decision on this
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. 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.