Article about psychology and plagiarism/credibility - interesting implications for feminists IMO

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I thought people here might like a heads up about the article given how often psychology ends up being discussed here. I'm not sure what I think of it, but it makes me feel the need to be cautious. Or, if it sounds like misogynistic horseshit ... maybe it really is misogynistic horseshit ...

www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice

It's an interesting article, the best part is that re it being hard to publish negative results. This is the essence of science but journals are essentially commercial on some level and need subscribers.

Thanks LRD.

Glad you liked it.

I found that bit disturbing too. I thought the bit about the academic who was trying to research morality was very interesting, because that sort of thing gets my feminist bullshit detector buzzing anyway.

When it comes to psychology I agree with Hannibal Lecter.

Why, what did he say about it lollygag?

He said he didn't consider Psychology to be a science.

It's always particularly impressive to be in agreement with a fictional character.

I agree with a lot of what Homer Simpson says as well!

Very interesting. The file drawer problem is an old one; ambiguous, negative or uninteresting research may be just as valid as the exciting sexy research that claims to have discovered something new, but it tends to not be published. It is always wise to be cautious of scientific research, and even more so when it has been distilled and sensationalised into a newspaper headline. I'm not sure if this applies more to psychology than it does to other sciences. There is plenty of junk science around that is not psychological.

Yes, I'm sure that's true nimpy - I did notice that the absolutely saddest example in that article was actually medical not psychological. The bit about someone faking something that led to cancer patients having their treatment messed around.

Ah lollygag the article addresses other sciences as well. In case you felt like reading it.

Talking of The Simpsons, do you remember the episode when Bart goes off the rails and is sent to a psychologist? He starts going nuts, throwing books off the shelves and the psychologist screams: "no, no! some of those books haven't even been discredited yet!"

I live psychology as a science, it is very diverse however, always challenging itself and sometimes research is bad, sometimes try get it very wrong but much of the time they get it right and improve life for people.

And this one:

Homer: What do we need a psychiatrist for? We know our kid is nuts.

Anyone have an update on the complaint filed to the APA regarding the dubious practices of Melissa Farley ?

I don't, but aren't they 'alleged' dubious practices still? I thought she'd simply come under fire from the sort of twits who didn't like her findings, but I only have a dim memory of hearing about it.

You are correct, they are still alleged. As I remember it was Callum Bennachie who filed it but many other academics have had concerns about her research methods and use of data.

Agree with the OP, interesting implications for feminists.

Ahh, will be interesting to hear what happens then.