Why cite something if any source will be rejected.
Where are we when no studies are trusted, and no review body of any study is trusted.
Don't think it is just social science. That is hubris, in our post truth world.
""A study published in 2018 in Nature Human Behaviour replicated 21 social and behavioral science papers from Nature and Science, finding that only about 62% could successfully reproduce original results."
Roger A (27 August 2018). "The Science Behind Social Science Gets Shaken Up—Again". Wired. Retrieved 2018-08-28.
Camerer CF, Dreber A, Holzmeister F, Ho TH, Huber J, Johannesson M, et al. (September 2018). "Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in
Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015". Nature Human Behaviour. 2 (9): 637–644. doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z. PMID 31346273. S2CID 52098703.
"For instance, a major reproducibility project that sought to replicate 193 experiments from 53 high-profile cancer biology research papers ran into multiple barriers."
Respect for citations. I'll read into this over the next few days.
I tend to treat papers as disinteresting until someone has asked me to tear a new hole in one (I can only really do that mathematically) or they have been reproduced. Decreases cognitive load when someone says "check this out".
We really trust scientific papers to have done the leg work. If it is in a respected peer reviewed publication, then we can trust it and then build on it.
We can't all individually reproduce every study.
I really fear for the future.
Because already there are tons of garbage studies being faked by AI flooding the world. It will become very difficult to know anything.
My only beef here is that it is not isolated to social sciences. HN really piles on social sciences while having a blind spot for STEM. Right when neuroscience and AI are converging and both sides need to have more understanding.
Where are we when no studies are trusted, and no review body of any study is trusted.
Don't think it is just social science. That is hubris, in our post truth world.
""A study published in 2018 in Nature Human Behaviour replicated 21 social and behavioral science papers from Nature and Science, finding that only about 62% could successfully reproduce original results."
Roger A (27 August 2018). "The Science Behind Social Science Gets Shaken Up—Again". Wired. Retrieved 2018-08-28. Camerer CF, Dreber A, Holzmeister F, Ho TH, Huber J, Johannesson M, et al. (September 2018). "Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in
Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015". Nature Human Behaviour. 2 (9): 637–644. doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z. PMID 31346273. S2CID 52098703.
https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/amid-a-replicati...
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.200566
EDIT
"For instance, a major reproducibility project that sought to replicate 193 experiments from 53 high-profile cancer biology research papers ran into multiple barriers."
https://bigthink.com/hard-science/the-replication-crisis-is-...
EDIT 2:
Physics Discussion https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/72/12/8/811763/The...