Quote (card_sultan @ Mar 7 2016 02:06am)

Some experiments produce results (data) that can be interpreted in many differents ways. Is it always wrong - no, is it always right - no. All Scientific results [things like Math and Chemistry - results are pretty indisputable] are not carved in stone and is ever expanding, constantly changing and merely a current representation of perspective. It is only people's opinion that is ornery, obstinate and unyielding.

Quote (NatureNames @ Mar 7 2016 11:51am)

*shugs* Psychology is not an exact science. Cognitive behavioral therapy or the placebo effect are not easily testable mediums (just to give two examples), but they nevertheless can produce significant results.

Quote (brmv @ Mar 7 2016 01:40pm)

during my time at university pyschology was offered both within the framework of natural sciences and humanities (not sure if it is still the same, since the bologna process might have changed that after i emigrated from europe)
from the psychologists (i had contact with during that time) those in the natural sciences branch adhered to very strict principles and performed their research with the same tenacity as common in natural sciences, while the ones from the humanities quite often used simple statistics based on not to many samples to back their ideas

Quote (xxx_aria @ Mar 15 2016 11:14pm)

Being unable to replicate experimental findings is not a crisis. It is poor scientific method.

The real crisis is the wide spread belief that social sciences or psychology are real sciences.

Quote (xxx_aria @ Mar 16 2016 06:14am)

Being unable to replicate experimental findings is not a crisis. It is poor scientific method.

The real crisis is the wide spread belief that social sciences or psychology are real sciences.

Quote (xxx_aria @ Mar 16 2016 12:14am)

Being unable to replicate experimental findings is not a crisis. It is poor scientific method.

The real crisis is the wide spread belief that social sciences or psychology are real sciences.

Quote (Wirbelschwein @ Mar 27 2016 02:49pm)

May i ask for a definition of real sciences?

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 27 2016 10:05pm)

They are "real sciences". Science is a process, and they use it. It just happens that they don't use it well. The term for poor methodology threatening a field with irreproducible data is "replication crisis "


Cell biology has a similar problem in that groups didn't often validate their cell lines, so it happens even in hard sciences.

Quote (Wirbelschwein @ Mar 27 2016 04:10pm)

may i ask for a definition of hard sciences?

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 27 2016 03:05pm)

They are "real sciences". Science is a process, and they use it. It just happens that they don't use it well. The term for poor methodology threatening a field with irreproducible data is "replication crisis "


Cell biology has a similar problem in that groups didn't often validate their cell lines, so it happens even in hard sciences.

Quote (Feynman)

We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It's a little bit off because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It's interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of an electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bit bigger than Millikan's, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher.

Why didn't they discover the new number was higher right away? It's a thing that scientists are ashamed of—this history—because it's apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong—and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number close to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that...

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 29 2016 12:38am)

Google is your friend
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_science

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 29 2016 04:38am)

Google is your friend
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_science