Since 1955, The Journal of Irreproducible Results has offered “spoofs, parodies, whimsies, burlesques, lampoons and satires” about life in the laboratory.
Among its greatest hits: “Acoustic Oscillations in Jell-O, With and Without Fruit, Subjected to Varying Levels of Stress” and “Utilizing Infinite Loops to Compute an Approximate Value of Infinity.” The good-natured jibes are a backhanded celebration of science. What really goes on in the lab is, by implication, of a loftier, more serious nature.
It has been jarring to learn in recent years that a reproducible result may actually be the rarest of birds. Replication, the ability of another lab to reproduce a finding, is the gold standard of science, reassurance that you have discovered something true. But that is getting harder all the time. With the most accessible truths already discovered, what remains are often subtle effects, some so delicate that they can be conjured up only under ideal circumstances, using highly specialized techniques.
Fears that this is resulting in some questionable findings began to emerge in 2005, when Dr. John P. A. Ioannidis, a kind of meta-scientist who researches research, wrote a paper pointedly titled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.”
Given the desire for ambitious scientists to break from the pack with a striking new finding, Dr. Ioannidis reasoned, many hypotheses already start with a high chance of being wrong. Otherwise proving them right would not be so difficult and surprising — and supportive of a scientist’s career. Taking into account the human tendency to see what we want to see, unconscious bias is inevitable. Without any ill intent, a scientist may be nudged toward interpreting the data so it supports the hypothesis, even if just barely.
The effect is amplified by competition for a shrinking pool of grant money and also by the design of so many experiments — with small sample sizes (cells in a lab dish or people in an epidemiological pool) and weak standards for what passes as statistically significant. That makes it all the easier to fool oneself.
Paradoxically the hottest fields, with the most people pursuing the same questions, are most prone to error, Dr. Ioannidis argued. If one of five competing labs is alone in finding an effect, that result is the one likely to be published. But there is a four in five chance that it is wrong. Papers reporting negative conclusions are more easily ignored.
Putting all of this together, Dr. Ioannidis devised a mathematical model supporting the conclusion that most published findings are probably incorrect.
The Latest on: Research results
[google_news title=”” keyword=”Research results” num_posts=”10″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
via Google News
The Latest on: Research results
- Citi Research pushes first rate cut to Julyon May 2, 2024 at 9:05 am
Spending on medical and financial services may reflect more issues with measuring prices than actual strength in real spending, as much of the strength in real GDP was concentrated there, said Analyst ...
- 2024 SecurityScorecard Research: Adversaries Exploit Third-Party Vulnerabilities to Maximize the Stealth, Speed, and Impact of Ransomware Attackson May 2, 2024 at 9:00 am
SecurityScorecard today announced findings from its 2024 Redefining Resilience: Concentrated Cyber Risk in a Global Economy Research, with McKinsey & Company as a knowledge partner. The threat ...
- Huawei is secretly funding U.S. research despite being blacklisted, report sayson May 2, 2024 at 7:14 am
Despite being on the U.S. trade blacklist since 2019, Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei has secretly been the sole funder of a research competition involving U.S. universities that is ...
- 'True Size' of China's Military Budget Could Match US Spending: Researchon May 2, 2024 at 6:40 am
Beijing's reported defense spending has ticked upward by 6.6 percent to 7.5 percent over the past five years, totaling less than one-third the defense budgets approved by Congress.
- The demand to cut research ties with Israelis is a blow to free inquiryon May 2, 2024 at 12:00 am
Squelching collaborations with academics because of their national origin goes against the purpose of higher education.
- New research raises questions about potentially toxic components of popular bandage products: 'It doesn't make sense for these companies to use it'on May 1, 2024 at 8:30 pm
In 65% of bandage varieties, testing discovered high levels of a marker that indicates the presence of toxins.
- Are You Driving What Research Shows Is A Speeding-Ticket Magnet?on May 1, 2024 at 1:43 pm
Rather, Insurify’s study of over 4.6 million car insurance applications found that European and Asian brands are most likely to be pulled over for speeding. Models from otherwise sedate luxury ...
- House COVID committee calling for criminal probe into gain-of-function virus research in Wuhanon May 1, 2024 at 1:07 pm
EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak appeared before the subcommittee on Wednesday to testify on the work of his organization before and throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
- House COVID panel grills EcoHealth Alliance chief, demands criminal probe over virus research in Wuhanon May 1, 2024 at 11:47 am
A House subcommittee investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic urged a criminal investigation of EcoHealth Alliance president Dr. Peter Daszak ahead of a Wednesday hearing, releasing a ...
- This Chinese virologist shared crucial Covid-19 data. Then his research hit hurdleson April 30, 2024 at 7:34 pm
Scientist was lauded for his 2020 disclosure, but in the years since, people who know him say he has faced unprecedented roadblocks in his career in China.
via Bing News