Monday , November 25 2024
Home / Lars P. Syll / Why most published research is wrong

Why most published research is wrong

Summary:
Why most published research is wrong [embedded content] After having mastered all the technicalities of regression analysis and econometrics, students often feel as though they are the masters of the universe. I usually cool them down with a required reading of Christopher Achen‘s modern classic Interpreting and Using Regression. It usually get them back on track again, and they understand that no increase in methodological sophistication … alter the fundamental nature of the subject. It remains a wondrous mixture of rigorous theory, experienced judgment, and inspired guesswork. And that, finally, is its charm. And in case they get too excited about having learned to master the intricacies of proper significance tests and p-values, I ask them to also

Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Lars Pålsson Syll writes What statistics teachers get wrong!

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Statistical uncertainty

Lars Pålsson Syll writes The dangers of using pernicious fictions in statistics

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Interpreting confidence intervals

Why most published research is wrong


After having mastered all the technicalities of regression analysis and econometrics, students often feel as though they are the masters of the universe. I usually cool them down with a required reading of Christopher Achen‘s modern classic Interpreting and Using Regression.

It usually get them back on track again, and they understand that

no increase in methodological sophistication … alter the fundamental nature of the subject. It remains a wondrous mixture of rigorous theory, experienced judgment, and inspired guesswork. And that, finally, is its charm.

And in case they get too excited about having learned to master the intricacies of proper significance tests and p-values, I ask them to also ponder on Achen’s warning:

Significance testing as a search for specification errors substitutes calculations for substantive thinking. Worse, it channels energy toward the hopeless search for functionally correct specifications and divert attention from the real tasks, which are to formulate a manageable description of the data and to exclude competing ones.

Advertisements
Lars Pålsson Syll
Professor at Malmö University. Primary research interest - the philosophy, history and methodology of economics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *