Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don’t think most people accept social science research as valid.

Replication crisis is a real phenomenon that will likely never go away unless we accept that social sciences will never have the rigor of hard sciences. More often than not it’s wielded as a political tool to support pre-existing biases and positions.

Also it doesn’t help that academia doesn’t reward those who seek to replicate studies which likely hides the magnitude of the problem.

“ According to a 2016 poll of 1,500 scientists reported that 70% of them had failed to reproduce at least one other scientist's experiment (50% had failed to reproduce one of their own experiments). In 2009, 2% of scientists admitted to falsifying studies at least once and 14% admitted to personally knowing someone who did” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis



Replication crisis is a real phenomenon that will likely never go away unless we accept that social sciences will never have the rigor of hard sciences

The replication crisis afflicts hard science too.


True, medicine especially.

Yet social sciences are particularly affected by this and there is currently no incentive to try to replicate existing studies.


Experimental studies have replication crisis, but the studies on this topic are not experimental studies. They are based on survey data and statistical analysis. They do have their challenges, but have nothing to do with the replication crisis.


If we were to try to replicate this study by sampling a different cohort of individuals we would likely see very different results.


What makes you say that? You have heard of the replication crisis - don’t you think that the researchers in that very field have heard of the replication crisis?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: