The reproducibility crisis is a significant concern that challenges the credibility and progress of science. Factors contributing to this issue include inadequate sample sizes, publication bias favoring positive results, and lack of transparency in data and methodologies. In fields such as psychology, medicine, and biology, replication studies often fail to confirm original findings, raising questions about the reliability of published research. Addressing this requires a cultural shift within the scientific community. Initiatives promoting open science such as preregistration of studies, sharing raw data, and publishing negative results can improve transparency and accountability. Additionally, funding and incentives should prioritize rigor and reproducibility over groundbreaking claims that might not hold under scrutiny. Beyond reproducibility, other systemic issues also merit attention. These include the overemphasis on impact factors, which can drive researchers to prioritize quantity over quality, and inequities in funding distribution, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Tackling these challenges will strengthen the foundation of science, fostering innovation and trust in its outcomes.
To sum it up: the core cause of all these issues are all societal in nature, not stemming from the actual methodological part of the scientific method and it's processes as exhibited in civilization. As such, a societal (as you put it 'cultural') change is required. It's also indicative that within several scientific disciplines a paradigmatic shift is looming as well. I agree. The issue is deep and jarring.
@@KSR4111-u4e He showed how Sabine Hossenfelder saying "scientific research is bullsh*t" does nothing to improve the problems with "research mills" It's worth a watch and opened my eyes to a scientist who gets more views from science deniers than anyone else.
Just read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldberg. Every medical doctor, social scientist and climate scientist should be required to pass a test based on this book before being admitted to the higher echelons of wisdom. The 'publish or perish' ethic should be modified and open source data should be mandated
That´s exactly what Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder says in her brilliant book "Lost in Math", published 2018. Recently she was attacked on YT by the ridiculous clown Dave Farina for her criticism. Happy to find, she´s confirmed here.
She keeps astounding me with her critical nature. She's even made some really beautiful critique of her own assumptions recently and they really show that she's willing to move forward but not if it's over the edge of reason. She's the only one championing rigorous academic disclosure in science on YT
More scientists need to sit down with this stuff I keep hearing really sideways takes on how scientists are describing what the reproducibility crisis is. That's the few that talk about it. It sounds like a story to cover up how bad it is
The reproducibility crisis is a significant concern that challenges the credibility and progress of science. Factors contributing to this issue include inadequate sample sizes, publication bias favoring positive results, and lack of transparency in data and methodologies. In fields such as psychology, medicine, and biology, replication studies often fail to confirm original findings, raising questions about the reliability of published research.
Addressing this requires a cultural shift within the scientific community. Initiatives promoting open science such as preregistration of studies, sharing raw data, and publishing negative results can improve transparency and accountability. Additionally, funding and incentives should prioritize rigor and reproducibility over groundbreaking claims that might not hold under scrutiny.
Beyond reproducibility, other systemic issues also merit attention. These include the overemphasis on impact factors, which can drive researchers to prioritize quantity over quality, and inequities in funding distribution, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Tackling these challenges will strengthen the foundation of science, fostering innovation and trust in its outcomes.
To sum it up: the core cause of all these issues are all societal in nature, not stemming from the actual methodological part of the scientific method and it's processes as exhibited in civilization. As such, a societal (as you put it 'cultural') change is required. It's also indicative that within several scientific disciplines a paradigmatic shift is looming as well. I agree. The issue is deep and jarring.
"Prof. Dave" could learn a thing or two here.
you mean David Farina. Why what did he do bro
I implore you, show some courage and name any, "thing or two" that "Prof Dave could learn" from this didactic edifying lecture ?
@@KSR4111-u4e He showed how Sabine Hossenfelder saying "scientific research is bullsh*t" does nothing to improve the problems with "research mills" It's worth a watch and opened my eyes to a scientist who gets more views from science deniers than anyone else.
lol also thought of him as soon as I saw the title. Not sure what to make of his recent Sabine hate. The Weinstein episode was great though
@@ACitizen1984 "Prof. Dave" is right a lot of the time, but he has an insufferable personality. I think he is jealous of Sabine's success.
Thank you very much, Sir I. Greetings and love from home ❤
Awesome~
Wait, I'm suppose to click on a link at the bottom to watch the rest of this? And it costs money to do so?
Just read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldberg. Every medical doctor, social scientist and climate scientist should be required to pass a test based on this book before being admitted to the higher echelons of wisdom. The 'publish or perish' ethic should be modified and open source data should be mandated
That´s exactly what Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder says in her brilliant book "Lost in Math", published 2018. Recently she was attacked on YT by the ridiculous clown Dave Farina for her criticism. Happy to find, she´s confirmed here.
She keeps astounding me with her critical nature. She's even made some really beautiful critique of her own assumptions recently and they really show that she's willing to move forward but not if it's over the edge of reason. She's the only one championing rigorous academic disclosure in science on YT
@@andrewbreding593 Yes, exactly, and she´s a fearless personality.
More scientists need to sit down with this stuff I keep hearing really sideways takes on how scientists are describing what the reproducibility crisis is. That's the few that talk about it. It sounds like a story to cover up how bad it is
Brilliant! What a Great guy. I'm a new fan, so definitely biased now
“False” → Maybe “Not Good” as it should be ‽
Wow. Who knew there was such impregnable integrity in the scientific community.
What does Zeus have to say about this?