You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

ChristianKl comments on Open Thread, Apr. 27 - May 3, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 27 April 2015 12:18AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (352)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ChristianKl 28 April 2015 01:47:23PM -2 points [-]

Yes, it is true that there are massive problems in failure to replicate in psychology, not to mention bad statistics etc. However, a single experiment is still evidence in favour.

Whether the reporter should be fired is not only about the quality of the experiment.

Thing is, Prof. Carroll is not a neuroscientist. So what gives her the right to tell neuroscientists that they are wrong about neuroscience?

The journalist in this case.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 28 April 2015 01:59:44PM 3 points [-]

Whether the reporter should be fired is not only about the quality of the experiment.

What criteria would you advocate then?

The journalist in this case.

Yes, obviously she has the legal right to argue about things she has no understanding of, and equally obviously I was not talking about legal rights.

Comment author: ChristianKl 28 April 2015 02:52:44PM 0 points [-]

What criteria would you advocate then?

Whether the article clearly communicates the scientific knowledge that exists. Most mainstream media article about science don't.

Yes, obviously she has the legal right to argue about things she has no understanding of, and equally obviously I was not talking about legal rights.

If the journalist quotes her, that likely means he called her on the phone and ask her for her opinion. If you think he should have asked somebody different then the journalist is at fault.