Some subscribers to
Math-Teach might be interested in a recent post "Re: Why Most
Published Research Findings Are False" [Hake (2012a)]. The
abstract reads:
**********************************************
ABSTRACT: In
"The Randomistas' War On Global Poverty - ERRATUM & ADDENDUM"
[Hake (2012b] at <http://bit.ly/YfMESg> I pointed to:
(a) a "PLoS
Medicine" article by John Ioannidis (2005)
<http://bit.ly/Vb1u70> titled "Why Most Published Research
Findings Are False" at <http://1.usa.gov/YxUxkL>, brought
to my attention by Guy Brandenberg; and
(b) a good
discussion of the important work of Ioannidis in the
"Atlantic": "Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science"
by David Freedman (2010) at <http://bit.ly/11aAmt0>. Freedman
wrote that Ioannidis (2005):
(1) claims that as much as 90 percent of the published medical
information that doctors rely on is flawed;
(2) states that randomized controlled trials. . . . ended up being
wrong some of the time;
(3) laid out a detailed mathematical proof that, assuming modest
levels of researcher bias, typically imperfect research techniques,
and the well-known tendency to focus on exciting rather than highly
plausible theories, researchers will come up with wrong findings most
of the time;
(4) is the most downloaded article in the history of "PLoS
Medicine."
BTW: Freedman claims
that meta-research experts have confirmed that similar issues distort
research in all fields of science, from physics to economics (where
DeLong& Lang at <http://bit.ly/SpNMww> showed how a
remarkably consistent paucity of strong evidence in published
economics studies made it unlikely that ANY of them were
right).
**********************************************
To access the
complete 9 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/Ve4Qnk>.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: <http://bit.ly/a6M5y0>
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs:
<http://bit.ly/9nGd3M>
Academia: <http://bit.ly/a8ixxm>
Blog: <http://bit.ly/9yGsXh>
GooglePlus: <http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE>
Twitter: <http://bit.ly/juvd52>
"It is not
enough to observe, experiment, theorize, calculate and communicate; we
must also argue, criticize, debate, expound, summarize, and otherwise
transform the information that we have obtained individually into
reliable, well established, public knowledge."
John Ziman. 1969. "Information, Communication,
Knowledge," Nature 224: 318-324;
abstract online at
<http://bit.ly/cNPB1d>.
REFERENCES [URL's
shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 02 Dec 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a.
"Re: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," online
on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://bit.ly/Ve4Qnk>. Post of
02 Dec 2012 11:39:22-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and
link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion
lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at
<http://bit.ly/YnrrWA> with a provision for
comments.
Hake, R.R. 2012b.
"The Randomistas' War On Global Poverty - ERRATUM &
ADDENDUM," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at
<http://bit.ly/YfMESg>. Post of 30 Nov 2012 12:15:33-0800 to
AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are
being transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog
"Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/11c5w3e> with a
provision for comments.