Empirical Research on Research and the Reproducibility Crisis - J. Ioannidis - 4/13/2016

Learn more:
- Event: www.caltech.edu/content/harris...
- The William & Myrtle Harris Distinguished Lectureship in Science and Civilization: www.hss.caltech.edu/content/ha...
Produced in association with Caltech Academic Media Technologies. ©2016 California Institute of Technology

[@MarkovChains223]

Starts at 5:15

[@markmartens]

"I would argue nevertheless, that this poses an even stronger incentive for making the complete evidence available. Because if you're interested about the cumulative evidence, and you have some selection force that allows only SOME of that evidence to be disseminated, or become visible, or only particular types of results are considered to be interesting enough to be communicated. Or have to modulate their analysis or their protocols in order to obtain these desirable results, then obviously the cumulative evidence is not going to solve the problem of lack of visibility. It will only create some seemingly reproducible chain of evidence that actually is just entirely wrong. We have seen that repeatedly. I mean we've seen many situations where some false notion was entrenched in the literature somehow. You know, famous expert supported it, and then people continued to build on that having the expectation that their results need to fit to that paradigm. It took a very long time for that whole cumulative chain of very selected results to be dismantled."

[@JCResDoc94]

30:00 best case - you create a sub field of the same replication pressure errors.

[@brianjensen7977]

Slayer of Theranos AND Covid Hysterics. John is the man!

[@JCResDoc94]

53:00 the editors did that. we just wanted to keep our jobs

[@JCResDoc94]

1:09:00 MEDICAL REVERSALS

[@JCResDoc94]

46:00 just re-jigger the impact factors. go w wat we kno

[@JCResDoc94]

43:44 yer - now talk about climate change.