George Christensen and Bob Katter seem to be using the science replication crisis to cast doubt on research findings that farmers don’t like.
Mick Tsikas/AAP Image
Across science, only around half of published results can be successfully replicated. But while this is a serious problem, the proposed public audit looks like a political bid to cast doubt on science.
Some studies don’t hold up to added scrutiny.
PORTRAIT IMAGES ASIA BY NONWARIT/shutterstock.com
Rising evidence shows that many psychology studies don't stand up to added scrutiny. The problem has many scientists worried – but it could also encourage them to up their game.
Some scientists think it’s time to hang up statistical significance.
Two prestigious journals have suggested abandoning the traditional test of the strength of a study's results. But a statistician worries that this would make science worse.
There is a growing research literature suggesting psychedelics hold incredible promise for treating mental health ailments ranging from depression and anxiety to PTSD.
To know the real promise of psychedelic substances like LSD, mushrooms and MDMA, researchers must embrace the principles and practise of 'open science.'
Negative results are still useful, and should not be hidden.
Questionable research practices are not fraud, and they're not cause for panic. But they do give us some hints about how we can make science more robust.
Economist, author and MP Andrew Leigh spoke to Fiona Fidler about how we should be using randomised trials more to drive decisions and policy in public life.
Bad research techniques have called into question the results of many psychology studies. Fixing the problem starts with making sure students don't pick up bad habits.