News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by Asdfbla on Monday October 02, 2017 @04:51PM (#15387837)
Pre-registration of studies is an interesting concept in that regard (also briefly mentioned in the article), where researchers can submit their study design and goals to a journal before conducting the study. It will then be accepted or rejected for publication based on the study design etc., not on the eventual outcome (as long as the study was actually conducted as promised and with care, of course).

The idea is probably only applicable to a small subset of scientific work (not good for exploratory and very novel stuff, for instance), but in certain specific areas it might make publication of negative results a more viable path for scientists because they don't have to fear that their idea was bad or they seem incompetent because of a negative result. (Since their design was accepted, at least some other people thought it was a good idea too.)

Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by throwaway2048 on Monday October 02, 2017 @07:35PM (#15388860)
The problem is the incentives don't change with a system like that, all that will happen is you have people rigging the pre-registers after they have already completed the study then sitting on results until the correct amount of time has passed.
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by wtallis on Monday October 02, 2017 @09:22PM (#15389353)
That's a very overt form of fraud, and it probably requires very different countermeasures than the kind of unintentional biases under discussion here.