[ExI] Why so much published 'science' is wrong.
rex at nosyntax.net
Sun Jul 12 00:02:58 UTC 2015
William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> [2015-07-11 16:53]:
> I estimate that even when you include our very best psychology journals,
> and only peer-reviewed ones, that about 75% of the studies printed are
> worthless - unrepeatable, used improper statistics, design, subject
> assignment, error control and so on. It's a very old story - no one is
> interested in doing a simple repeat of an experiment, even when they get
> astonishing results. I got some of those while doing my Master's work,
> and my professor made me do the study ten times before he was convinced
> that it was reliable (not necessarily valid, just reliable).
> I can think of a better way. Instead of the usual approach, if the
> engineering students took two quarters of calculus (where you use
> Wolfram’s magic act rather than learn twenty different ways to integrate
> the kinds of functions you never seen to get in real life) and take
> three quarters of statistics, where the students use Wolfram again
> (rather than spending the time on how to calculate all those parameters)
> then spend their time figuring out how to interpret what the computer
> gave them.
> I did some searching and found this whole discussion on reducing
> calculus education veered off in the wrong direction by about a radian.
> A faction took off with the idea of calculus reduction, but presented a
> weird justification: women and minority students are less likely to pass
> the calculus series (sheesh) and of course you can’t go on in the
> sciences without it, so that means fewer women and minorities in the
> sciences, all because of calculus. My notion is the reason for calculus
> reduction would be to make room for more statistics study. Perhaps the
> minority argument derailed the notion of statistical education or sent
> it down the wrong road, damn.
In the paleolithic era I taught math at SDSU. Later, I realized
statistical inference, not calculus, was the future. It's happening,
albeit slowly in human terms.
More information about the extropy-chat