Of course, not all file-drawer and other biases in science are ill-willed. Some may be the result of well-meaning but misplaced trust in a supervisor's hypothesis. More on this in the future.
As an aside, I'm not a fan of TED talks in general. They tend to elevate whizz-bang intellectualism rather than rational thought. They're an opportunity to profess one's knowledge and to associate with said people. Forget your skeptical hat at your peril.
In my opinion, human knowledge advances through continual stages of uncertainty and pitfalls but nevertheless manages to make amazing strides. One fundamental problem with research is that a subjective bias is very rarely absent from the research question and its design. Is it possible that research is more effectively when undertaken by urgent necessity, such as the development of radar by the British during WWII?
ReplyDeleteIf one takes a Baysian view of science, then subjective biases most definately shape priors and thus posterior outcomes of research; even whole fields could be affected by prevailing attitudes. I'm come across a PNAS paper talking about this more generally; I'll send you a link if/when I get around to writing about it!
ReplyDeleteWhat's the file-drawer effect?
ReplyDeleteAnother term for publication bias.
ReplyDelete