News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Are Experts Real?. Parent comment

Re:Are Experts Real? by nradov on Monday January 11, 2021 @12:25PM (#25732248)
Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Are Experts Real? by berekuk on Monday January 11, 2021 @01:21PM (#25733301)
On the other hand, here's a hilarious response how Ioannidis is wrong in his claim from one of the most well-known replication crisis blogs: https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/24/ioannidis-is-wrong-m...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Are Experts Real? by nradov on Monday January 11, 2021 @02:32PM (#25734951)
Why do you suppose they chose to publish this hit piece as a blog post instead of going through the peer review process with a real journal article? Or at least a formal letter to PLoS Medicine?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Are Experts Real? by berekuk on Tuesday January 12, 2021 @06:39AM (#25745508)
I'm not sure. Maybe they did both and the real article is somethere in peer review pipeline. (Do you imply that no posts on replicationindex should be trusted since they're not properly peer reviewed?)

One possible reason is that blog posts are more widely shared on social media, and I agree that this is kind of a hit piece, mostly as a reaction to Ioannidis' contrarian stance on COVID-19, so publicity was probably an objective here.

[ Parent | on HN ]