= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Salemicus comments on [Link] Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (17)
The author of the article, Ioannidis, has published extensively about the unreliability of reported medical and biochemical results, over a more than 10 year period. The article is not so much "biased" towards psychology, as focusing on that one area.
Right, "focusing" is a better description. But I wonder if this focusing resulted in a generalization which is a bit too sweeping. The "publish or perish" race is certainly everywhere in academia, but its side effects might be better mitigated in some areas than in others.