The Nine Circles of Scientific Hell

Comments

• brisk@aussie.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  What’s in plagiarism?

  source
• FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I-V is present in 75 percent of papers my field. When did peer review standards get so low? As long as it fits the narrative of the reviewers they seem to accept any work no matter how sloppy.

  source

  • sinceasdf@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Money. Science is resource intensive and a big business.

    source
• Sergio@slrpnk.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I think III would be better titled “Post-Hoc Hypothesizing,” i.e. where you create (or change) your experiment’s hypothesis after the experiment - clearly that is wrong. “Post-hoc storytelling” sounds like what you do in the “implications” or “next steps” part of a paper. Also, exploratory studies have different standards, right? (I’ve never done an exploratory study.)

  In the graphic, I thought “Non-Publication” and “Partial Publication” referred to experiments, i.e. where you run 4 experiments and only report on the last one, which “worked” – clearly that is wrong. However they are talking about data, which is a bit trickier. In some cases you can’t just upload all your data onto github; it may take a while because some sponsor or corporate office needs to review it before it can be released. A researcher may refuse to release their data until they finish writing a set of papers based on it. There may also be distribution limitations, or licensing requirements related to the data. I’m not trying to defend withholding data, just that these are the problems that need to be addressed.

  Finally, to extend the metaphor, the “publish or perish” mentality is this image’s Satan.

  source
• sga@lemmings.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  not going to lie, I am in this picture and I don’t like it

  source