Proving that something doesn’t work can be valuable data, too. Especially in research close to industrial interests… celebrate failures!
Unfortunately, this is science too.
Submitted 10 months ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0bff87ad-4e5e-4def-a9da-737aec6f12e0.jpeg
Comments
chonomaiwokurae@lemm.ee 10 months ago
drre@feddit.org 10 months ago
well yeah, but there is money in knowing what to avoid. in academia it’s more like “why can’t i reproduce this effect i read about in this fancy paper, am i stupid or what”, when maybe, they just got lucky, or had plenty of very reasonable analysis options to choose from, or simply fudged the numbers. i fear that in much of academia there is a huge incentive to publish at whatever cost
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 10 months ago
Make sure you publish that shit somehow so the next person doesn’t waste their time on the same experiment.
rustydrd@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Null results are still results!
conditional_soup@lemm.ee 10 months ago
I remember listening to an episode of TWiV where they bemoaned that more negative results weren’t published. They’re useful, too, just not nearly as cool and flashy as positive results.
DannyBoy@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I didn’t know Richard Stallman did research.
rustydrd@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Actually, this is Stannis Baratheon from The Witcher.
fossilesque@mander.xyz 10 months ago
Lol I love this
miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
“Give me six lines of data harvested from the most honourable of men, and I will find an excuse in them to hang him.”
– Pileated Woodpecker Richdude
peteypete420@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
A scholar can never let mere wrongness get in the way of the theory
FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 months ago
Big respect to researchers who publish and share statistically insignificant results.
Instead of doing what is far too common in science, manipulating the data until you find “significance” through twisted interpretations.
prex@aussie.zone 10 months ago
xkcd.com/882/
Probius@sopuli.xyz 10 months ago
Is it valid science if you re-test the one that had the link to see if it was a fluke?
rikudou@lemmings.world 10 months ago
Biology papers and Photoshop, name a more iconic duo.