I had been cautioned off social psychology years back with a friend (who had been an investigation psychiatrist) due to the area s tendency for sexy results which get lots of media play. Like a lay person he doubted I possibly could tell the fake in the reliable, the main one removed from the replicable. Later another person explained about how exactly dispiriting it had been participating in data dredging to locate something publishable inside a lab where these were working, despite the fact that most of the principals involved clearly assumed the results weren t robust. Remember that while you're reading concerning the mind-dazzling scientific fraud perpetrated by Diederik Stapel. It appears like he may be the Bernie Madoff of psychology. The Lehman Siblings towards the Long-term Capital Control over Marc Hauser. Here s an idea:
Stapel s work placed an extensive selection of attention-catching subjects, such as the influence of energy on moral thinking and also the result of researchers to some plagiarism scandal. The committee, which questioned a large number of Stapel s former students, postdoctoral scientists, co-authors, and co-workers, discovered that Stapel alone was accountable for the fraud. The panel reported he would discuss at length experimental designs, including drafting questionnaires, and would then claim that they can conduct the experiments at high schools and colleges that he'd special plans. The experiments, however, never happened, the colleges came to the conclusion. Stapel composed the information sets, that they then gave a student or collaborator for analysis, researchers allege. In other instances, the report states, he told co-workers he had a classic data set laying around he hadn t yet had an opportunity to evaluate. When Stapel did conduct actual experiments, the committee found evidence he altered the outcomes.
Here s the questionable factor I m likely to say: cases of flamboyant fraud are most likely much less of the problem inside a discipline like social psychology than more subtle biases and systematic incentives. Similarly, someone like Bernie Madoff was notable for that havoc he triggered with an individual level, but he paled within the aggregate from the dying with a 1000 cuts that happened because the housing industry flattened underneath the pall of modest liar financial loans and so on. Which isn t just an issue with science. Sexy social mental scientific studies are routinely blasted through the press, and devoured through the public. Incentives matter, and Diederik Stapel is only the reductio ad absurdum of researchers who react to the repeated fifteen minutes of fame that the press provides. More often than not this is not too blatant, nor frankly so malicious because of this. I doubt that you will find many�Diederik Stapel s within the area, else he wouldn t have become to date with bluster and bluff.
No comments:
Post a Comment