{"id":28491,"date":"2015-08-28T13:56:46","date_gmt":"2015-08-28T11:56:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ocasapiens-dweb.blogautore.repubblica.it\/?p=28491"},"modified":"2021-11-15T19:14:00","modified_gmt":"2021-11-15T18:14:00","slug":"replicabilita-dei-e-bias","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/2015\/08\/28\/replicabilita-dei-e-bias\/","title":{"rendered":"Replicabilit\u00e0, d\u00e8i e bias"},"content":{"rendered":"

L’ex star europea della psicologia sociale, Diederik Stapel, s’\u00e8 visto ritrattare<\/a> il 55\u00b0<\/strong> articolo fraudolento, e nella sua disciplina i paper<\/a> cadono come mosche. Science<\/em> pubblica oggi le stime <\/a><\/strong>dell’Open Science Collaboration<\/a>, il gruppo di 270 volontari che ha scelto 100 paper usciti sulle principali riviste –\u00a0Psychological Science,\u00a0<\/em>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition<\/em> – e\u00a0con l’aiuto degli autori, ha provato a replicare gli esperimenti. Conclusione:<\/p>\n

A large portion of replications produced weaker evidence for the original findings despite using materials provided by the original authors, review in advance for methodological fidelity, and high statistical power to detect the original effect sizes.<\/em><\/p>\n

La “large portion<\/a>” \u00e8 del 48%, una sottovalutazione perch\u00e9 l’OSC non quantifica un bias piuttosto ovvio, secondo me: gli autori disposti a partecipare erano i pi\u00f9 certi dei propri risultati. John Bohannon<\/a> raccoglie pareri ottimisti, del tipo finalmente \u00e8 iniziato il ripulisti, e altri che lo sono meno:<\/p>\n

\u201cSome will be tempted to conclude that psychology is a bad apple,\u201d says Charles Carver, a psychologist at the University of Miami who was one of the editors of\u00a0JPSP\u00a0in 2008. He insists this is not the case. \u201cThis is a problem of science, medical science no less than behavioral science.\u201d\u00a0Replication efforts in other fields are equally low, says John Ioannidis, a biologist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, who suspects the true proportion of psychology papers that are not false positive is \u201csomething like 25% \u2026 [which] seems to be in the same ballpark as what we see in many biomedical disciplines.\u201d <\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

John I. \u00e8 diplomatico, stando a un altro tentativo<\/a><\/strong> di ripulisti, la replicabilit\u00e0 dei risultati biomed \u00e8 attorno all’11%<\/a>.
\nRetraction Watch intervista<\/a><\/strong> Jelte M. Wicherts\u00a0sul lavoro dell’OSC:<\/p>\n

Overall, I am not surprised by these findings. We already have quite strong indirect and direct evidence for the relatively high publication and reporting biases in psychology (and other fields), implying that many findings in the psychological literature are too good to be true. <\/em>(…)
\nThis project quite clearly shows that findings reported in the top psychology journals should not be taken at face value. The project is also reassuring in the sense that it shows how many psychological researchers are genuinely concerned about true progress in our field.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

Da prendere con chili di sale quindi, gli esperimenti dello psicologo\u00a0Ara Norenzayan<\/a>, univ. British Columbia<\/a>, et al. sul rapporto tra religioni ed evoluzione dell’altruismo e della morale:<\/span><\/p>\n

Groups with \u201cmoralizing, interventionist deities or spirits \u2026 expand because all things being equal, they do better than the noncooperative groups,\u201d he says. \u201cAnd then the beliefs expand\u201d alongside them. \u201cTake this idea to its extreme and we get world religions,\u201d he says, such as Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism.<\/em><\/p>\n

Chiss\u00e0 quali d\u00e8i “moralizzatori” hanno fatto evolvere l’altruismo delle api o dei bonobo, e la ferocia disumana dei fondamentalisti che ne praticano la “morale”… Rif. anche l’articolo di Lizzie Wade<\/a> su un’altra iniziativa<\/a><\/strong> di Norenzayan:<\/p>\n

the Database of Religious History, the brainchild of a multidisciplinary team investigating the evolution of religion. They’re attempting to bridge the gulf between humanistic and scientific scholarship, but success hinges on enticing leading scholars like (Anders) Petersen to join them. \u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Il database compila risposte “s\u00ec\/no” a domande sui comportamenti incoraggiati o condannati dagli d\u00e8i moralizzatori,<\/p>\n

to \u201cforce historians to do what historians hate to do\u201d\u2014turn their qualitative knowledge into black-and-white quantitative data.<\/em><\/p>\n

Forse gli storici delle religioni sanno che senza un contesto culturale dell’interlocutore e uno storico-sociale del comportamento, sono domande talmente semplicistiche da essere prive di senso?<\/p>\n

Su un tema affine, Ian Tattersall e Jeffrey Schwartz protestano<\/a><\/strong> contro il casi<\/del> la pagaille fatta dagli antropologi nel classificare le specie Homo:<\/em><\/p>\n

The fact that detail has often been overshadowed by generalization in the study of the hominin fossil record is a product of paleoanthropology’s unique history. But tradition alone cannot justify maintaining the status quo. Perhaps it is time to forget parochial habit and to begin approaching hominid systematics as students of other organisms do (…)\u00a0In contrast to Mayr’s austere linearity, we may find that human evolution rivaled that of other mammals in its evolutionary experimentation and luxuriant diversity.<\/em><\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Orchidee australiane<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Gli “studiosi di altri organismi”, scrive\u00a0Erik Stokstad<\/a>\u00a0hanno appena creato un nuovo albero filogenetico, che spiega l’evoluzione accelerata della diversit\u00e0 nelle orchidee.<\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

Daniel Clery <\/a><\/strong>\u00e8 andato alla TriAlpha, di cui si parla parecchio perch\u00e9 l’altro giorno<\/p>\n

chief technology officer Michl Binderbauer announced that by June the new machine was producing FRCs <\/em>(le field-reversed configurations usate per creare un blob di plasma, ndr) lasting 5 milliseconds with no sign of decay.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Sta costruendo una macchina pi\u00f9 potente,<\/p>\n

A 10-fold increase in temperature would make their plasma hot enough to spark reactions in conventional fusion fuel, a mixture of the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium, known as D-T. Tri Alpha’s goal\u2014hydrogen-boron fusion\u2014will require ion temperatures above 3 billion degrees Celsius. Plasma physicist Jon Menard of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory in New Jersey, who was not involved in the project, says that would be \u201cvery challenging.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Burton Richter, del com. scientifico di TriAlpha, trova invece che il progetto sia promettente.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Mondo crudele<\/strong><\/p>\n

Anche Barney Panovsky ha sgonfiato<\/a><\/strong> le speranze suscitate nei credenti FuF dal brevetto per uno scaldabagno elettrico.<\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

Ghiacci artici in picchiata<\/a><\/strong>, trichechi di nuovo stipati a migliaia<\/a><\/strong> su strisce di terra ferma, erosione costiera record<\/a><\/strong> in Alaska, un cartone<\/a><\/strong> animato della NASA sull’innalzamento del livello del mare<\/a> e, mondo crudele bis<\/em>,\u00a0bancarotte<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>in serie delle Big Coal<\/a><\/strong> americane.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

L’ex star europea della psicologia sociale, Diederik Stapel, s’\u00e8 visto ritrattare il 55\u00b0 articolo fraudolento, e nella sua disciplina i paper cadono come mosche. Science pubblica oggi le stime dell’Open Science Collaboration, il gruppo di 270 volontari che ha scelto 100 paper usciti sulle principali riviste –\u00a0Psychological Science,\u00a0Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,\u00a0\u00a0Journal of Experimental… Continua a leggere Replicabilit\u00e0, d\u00e8i e bias<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2,6,10,16,20,26],"tags":[359,437,813,2483,2848,4616,5026,5810],"class_list":["post-28491","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-altri-animali","category-biologia","category-clima","category-fisica","category-medicina","category-psicologia","tag-altruismo","tag-andrea-rossi","tag-big-coal","tag-evoluzione","tag-fusione-calda","tag-morale","tag-open-science-collaboration","tag-religioni","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28491","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28491"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28491\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43659,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28491\/revisions\/43659"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28491"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28491"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archivio.ocasapiens.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28491"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}