CarlShulman comments on Using degrees of freedom to change the past for fun and profit - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Loading…
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (23)
We, the readers, can take both the parachute paper and the Bem paper as highlighting flaws and limitations of standard methods (in psychology and evidence-based medicine) by using them to derive bogus conclusions (don't use parachutes, and precognition is real). Likewise with the "False Positive Psychology" paper at the top.
But saying that Bem's paper wasn't about parapsychology suggests that he intended it as a warning against flawed methods just like the parachute people did. That looks like defending people who do bad science by saying "it was all a joke, really!"