Boiling scientific truth down to a single number has had bad consequences for our understanding of the world.
Articles on P-hacking
Displaying all articles
The journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) recently retracted several papers by a leading researcher on food and consumption. What does this mean for the researcher’s findings?
Questionable research practices are not fraud, and they’re not cause for panic. But they do give us some hints about how we can make science more robust.
Scientists have a big problem: Many psychological studies don’t hold up to scrutiny. Is it time to redefine statistical significance?
This is the second part in a series on how we edit science, looking at hypothesis testing, the problem of p-hacking and how the peer review process works.
Top contributors
-
Adjunct Professor, Macquarie University
-
University Distinguished Professor and Department Head of Statistics, Texas A&M University
-
Professor of Philosophy, University of Sydney
-
Lecturer in Mathematics, Flinders University
-
Postdoctoral Researcher , The University of Melbourne
-
Professor, School of Biosciences & School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne
-
Neuroscientist and Associate Lecturer specialising in neuropsychopharmacology, University of Wollongong