so i m not saying that. in fact, i will say there s something in psychology called the replication crisis where 50%, half of papers and studies can t be replicated. the problem is that there s a corruption in scholarship in certain fields of literature, and that corruption is not only affecting institutional policy in the united states, but it s getting out into public policies. so we re making public policies around morally fashionable nonfalsifiable conclusions. but isn t there another problem with the way you are trying to expose it? that is, you are saying that these woke people who are running our universities, particularly our humanities departments right now, they have a preconceived set of ideas, and all they want from research is for it to reinforce their ideas. but don t you also now have a set of pre formed ideas? you hate this woke culture and you launched this project of yours specifically to undermine the woke culture. you, therefore, had your own
say there is something in psychology all the replication crisis where 50%, half of papers and studies can t be replicated. the problem is that there is a corruption in scholarship in certain fields of literature, and that corruption is not only affecting institutional policy in the united states, but it is getting out into public policies so we are making public policies around morally fashionable nonfalsifiable conclusions. fashionable nonfalsifiable conclusions. but isn t there another problem conclusions. but isn t there another problem with - conclusions. but isn t there another problem with the l conclusions. but isn t there i another problem with the way you are trying to expose it? that is you are saying that these woke people running our universities, particularly our humanitarian departments right now, they have a preconceived set of ideas, and all they want from researchers for it to reinforce their ideas. but don t you also now have a set of preformed ideas? you hate this
yeah. but you see, the wider point is that you didn t do this project in a way that really made your findings and your conclusions valid. you didn t, for example, try to fake some paper for an economicsjournal or for a chemistry or a science journal to see whether it wasn t so much that there was a problem here with the ideology of the humanities departments you were trying to expose, but maybe there was a different problem, that peer review as a system is collapsing in many universities and journals, that there aren t enough academics who want to seriously do peer review and that the standards are slipping across the board. you can t know whether that s the right conclusion because you didn t do a control. you know, again, to mention helen pluckrose, she has a great response to that. to say that your neighbour has a problem with cockroaches in their house does not demean the fact that you have rats in your house. so i m not saying that. in fact, i will say there s something in psychol
An analysis of more than 1000 science journals published over 38 years suggests that 12 per cent of journal editors publish a fifth of their own research