Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
For example, if one collects some data, applies several different significance tests to it, and publishes only the one that happens to have a p-value less than 0.05, then the total p-value for "at least one significance test reaches p < 0.05" can be much larger than 0.05, because even if the null hypothesis were true, the probability that one ...
For example, a survey of US public in 2004 found that religiosity correlates with support of nanotechnology. [11] Additionally, in climate communication , even though today the majority of people worldwide believe climate change is a global emergency, [ 12 ] climate action has been impeded by other factors, such as political opposition ...
Psychology Today content and its therapist directory are found in 20 countries worldwide. [3] Psychology Today's therapist directory is the most widely used [4] and allows users to sort therapists by location, insurance, types of therapy, price, and other characteristics. It also has a Spanish-language website.
Leek summarized the key points of agreement as: when talking about the science-wise false discovery rate one has to bring data; there are different frameworks for estimating the science-wise false discovery rate; and "it is pretty unlikely that most published research is false", but that probably varies by one's definition of "most" and "false".
Presentation of data that seems to support claims while suppressing or refusing to consider data that conflict with those claims. [58] This is an example of selection bias or cherry picking , a distortion of evidence or data that arises from the way that the data are collected.
Hyperbolic discounting leads to choices that are inconsistent over time—people make choices today that their future selves would prefer not to have made, despite using the same reasoning. [52] Also known as current moment bias or present bias, and related to Dynamic inconsistency. A good example of this is a study showed that when making food ...
A 2009 systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data found that about 2% of scientists admitted to falsifying, fabricating, or modifying data at least once. [ 3 ] Incidents should only be included in this list if the individuals or entities involved have their own Wikipedia articles, or in the absence of an article, where the misconduct ...
The nature of these issues and the resulting problems form the five diseases that threaten science: "significosis, an inordinate focus on statistically significant results; neophilia, an excessive appreciation for novelty; theorrhea, a mania for new theory; arigorium, a deficiency of rigor in theoretical and empirical work; and finally ...