= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
VoiceOfRa comments on Open Thread, Apr. 27 - May 3, 2015 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (352)
Now consider what kind of publication biases incidents like that introduce.
Well, one would hope that journals would continue to publish, but the public understanding of science is inevitably going to suffer.
How about what's actually likely to happen, as opposed to what one would hope would happen.
What is likely to happen is that publication bias increases against non-PC results.
Correct.
You may have heard accusations that conservatives are "anti-science". Most of said "anti-science" behavior is conservatives applying a filter to scientific results attempting to correct for the above bias.
Of course this doesn't give one a licence to simply ignore science that disagrees with one's politics. Perhaps a ratio of two PC papers are as reliable as one non-PC paper? Very difficult to properly calibrate I would think, and of course the reliability varies from field to field.