Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Speaking of the validity of non-internet sources, especially journals...

Fraud Scandal Fuels Debate Over Practices of Social Psychology

I include a link to the whole article, but this part caught my attention--because I am not so sure if it is limited to just that field:

But one methodological expert, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, of the University of Amsterdam, added a sociological twist to the statistical debate: Psychology, he argued in a recent blog post and an interview, has become addicted to surprising, counterintuitive findings that catch the news media's eye, and that trend is warping the field.
"If high-impact journals want this kind of surprising finding, then there is pressure on researchers to come up with this stuff," says Mr. Wagenmakers, an associate professor in the psychology department's methodology unit.

1 comment:

  1. Didn't I say?

    And as to the validity of the internet for sources:

    I think of the internet as a town: you would not want to get your research info from a guy at the local pub; rather, you should go to the library.

    And there are *so* many good libraries in this town; some even offer information that you could not get any way else short of traveling.

    I'm thinking, for instance, Renaissance manuscripts that previously I had to go to London to see....