newest 100 mentions

The questions EnChroma glasses answer and raise in regards to the problem of color

comment by Gre123778 in philosophy

1 hour, 7 minutes ago

lol. I don't know where you went to school, but most schools actually do it and it's already in their books they use for science class. I remember it being in mine as well as testing.

So it's too expensive to have the kids look at a piece of paper and say what number they see?

I'm talking about the USA. I don't know what country you're talking about. Yes schools are broke, but not nearly as broke as you make them out to be. They have plenty of money for bringing in the kids from the "hood" everyday with busses. They drive let's say 20 miles each way and pay for the gas, bus, and a ton of money to the drivers who then get paid to sit around for the whole day and wait to take them home. At least that's how it is in Los Angeles.

What is the sexiest thing anyone has ever said to you?

comment by GiantNinja in AskReddit

2 hours, 55 minutes ago

I've hear that... why is it better for porn searches (just curious since I never use bing... and for science)

What ridiculously popular thing have you never partaken in?

comment by blamb211 in AskReddit

3 hours, 3 minutes ago

Alright, let's do this. For science and posterity.

started a fallout themed gameroom/office this week. here is the progress so far, any suggestions for paint scheme?

comment by Kyandivh in gaming

4 hours, 7 minutes ago

Cold steel gray with just a hint of radiation. For science.

Science AMA Series: We are authors of "Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science" coordinated by the Center for Open Science AUA

comment by CenterForOpenScience in science

6 hours, 55 minutes ago

Yes, this is important. I wrote a longer reply in another thread about this. The key is that both confirmatory and exploratory approaches are vitally important for science. Also vitally important? Knowing which is which. There is no shame in not knowing the answer in advance. We need to explore data because we are studying things that we do not understand. We SHOULD be surprised by some outcomes. But, can also express freely that these results were obtained via discovery. That is, the discovery process helped generate a new hypothesis. Testing it requires new data. I have rarely had push back in reporting exploratory results as exploratory. In the other thread I pointed out that we made this explicit in my first project (master's thesis) and in my most recent publication (earlier this week). Try being straightforward with it; you might be surprised by reviewers' responsiveness to it.

Science AMA Series: We are authors of "Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science" coordinated by the Center for Open Science AUA

comment by grasshoppermouse in science

8 hours, 32 minutes ago

> Both confirmatory (hypothesis testing) and exploratory (hypothesis generating) approaches are vitally important for science. But, it is critical that the distinction be clear - one cannot confidently generate and test a hypothesis with the same data.

I agree completely. But in addition, there must be new incentives to report exploratory research as such, instead of denigrating it as data dredging (which it is if it's disguised as confirmatory research so as to get published). In other words, I have no incentive to do exploratory research, and honestly label it as such, because it won't get published, and I will therefore get no academic credit. Science needs some new norms, e.g., every research project would typically be required to have an exploratory part, which the researchers somehow get credit for (publication?), and a confirmatory part, similar to how things are supposed to work now.

Finally starting Dune after so many positive reviews on here!

comment by the_pugilist in books

10 hours, 21 minutes ago

SciFi is fiction. It's short for Science Fiction. There is no non-fiction fiction.

Science AMA Series: We are authors of "Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science" coordinated by the Center for Open Science AUA

comment by SeeMikeRun in science

11 hours, 11 minutes ago

I think this is a great thing for sciences (as the issue is not limited to psychology based on the report) to address. Be it because of how articles are excepted, misuse of stats, publish or perish mentality, devaluation of replication or other. This and other research and papers on this sort of thing need to be used as a great source of feedback to help these fields make changes toward greater rigor, better use of limited funds for research and more trustworthy findings. I'm excited that this discussion is happening. Thank you for helping identify and begin the process to improve.

keeping track of 677,824 reddits