a large amount of unpublished ideas that are known to insiders because they are shared only informally but still influence the results published in the field in a way that is opaque to outsiders and beyond comment/​consideration
That is a great point,. If I were describing my results to another expert who understood bayesian reasoning, I would speak differently. Perhaps I will do a writeup in that framework.
faking or exaggerating data/​results in order to reach publication standards of evidence
so fucking true. Or dropping disconfirming evidence, which is easy to do. I had peer reviewers ask me to do this. If I find time, I will post an anonymized quote.
That is a great point,. If I were describing my results to another expert who understood bayesian reasoning, I would speak differently. Perhaps I will do a writeup in that framework.
so fucking true. Or dropping disconfirming evidence, which is easy to do. I had peer reviewers ask me to do this. If I find time, I will post an anonymized quote.