<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>jaapweel&apos;s Comments - LessWrong 2.0 viewer</title>
        <link>https://www.greaterwrong.com/</link>
        <description>jaapweel&apos;s Comments - LessWrong 2.0 viewer</description>
        <generator>xml-emitter</generator>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <item>
            <title>Comment by jaapweel on Follow-up on ESP study: &quot;We don&apos;t publish replications&quot;</title>
            <link>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/b9vvmMn2kF76aThHn/follow-up-on-esp-study-we-don-t-publish-replications#comment-3YpZ7DzsqRduJHPyc</link>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;A former pro&#xAD;fes&#xAD;sor and co-au&#xAD;thor of mine has a pa&#xAD;per about pub&#xAD;li&#xAD;ca&#xAD;tion bias in PLoS Medicine:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0050201&quot; class=&quot;bare-url&quot;&gt;http://​​www.plosmedicine.org/​​ar&#xAD;ti&#xAD;cle/​​info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjour&#xAD;nal.pmed.0050201&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He has a num&#xAD;ber of sug&#xAD;ges&#xAD;tions for fix&#xAD;ing things, but the main thrust ap&#xAD;pears to be that in a digi&#xAD;tal world, there is no longer any rea&#xAD;son for jour&#xAD;nals to only pub&#xAD;lish pa&#xAD;pers that are “in&#xAD;ter&#xAD;est&#xAD;ing” as well as method&#xAD;olog&#xAD;i&#xAD;cally de&#xAD;cent, and they have no ex&#xAD;cuse not to adopt a policy of pub&#xAD;lish&#xAD;ing all pa&#xAD;pers that ap&#xAD;pear cor&#xAD;rect. But he has a num&#xAD;ber of other sug&#xAD;ges&#xAD;tions too.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
            <author>jaapweel</author>
            <guid>3YpZ7DzsqRduJHPyc</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:04:26 +0000</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>