Clarke’s Law: Any sufficiently crappy research is indistinguishable from fraud (Pizzagate edition)

March 20, 2017
By

(This article was originally published at Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science, and syndicated at StatsBlogs.)

This recent Pizzagate post by Nick Brown reminds me of our discussion of Clarke’s Law last year.

P.S. I watched a couple more episodes of Game of Thrones on the plane the other day. It was pretty good! And so I continue to think this watching GoT is more valuable than writing error-ridden papers such as “Lower Buffet Prices Lead to Less Taste Satisfaction.”

Indeed, I think that if people spent more time watching Game of Thrones and less time chopping up their data and publishing their statistically significant noise in the Journal of Sensory Studies, PPNAS, etc., the world would be a better place.

So, if you’re working in a lab and your boss asks you to take a failed study and get it published four times as if it were a success, my advice to you: Spend more time on Facebook, Twitter, Game of Thrones, Starbucks, spinning class. Most of us will never remember what we read or posted on Twitter or Facebook yesterday. But if you publish four papers with 150 errors, people will remember that forever.

P.P.S. From Clifford Anderson-Bergman, here’s another person who should’ve spent less time in the lab and more time watching TV. Key quote: “In court documents, prosecutors noted that Kinion set out to win prestige and advance his career rather than enriching himself.”

The post Clarke’s Law: Any sufficiently crappy research is indistinguishable from fraud (Pizzagate edition) appeared first on Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science.



Please comment on the article here: Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

Tags: ,


Subscribe

Email:

  Subscribe