undefined | Better HN

0 pointszeroonetwothree3y ago0 comments

Surely the burden of proof should be on the side making the claim?

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

bee_rider3y ago· 4 in thread

I’ve in general grown somewhat averse to the “burden of proof points in some direction” line of thinking.

They are both making claims. (And I think usually most people are making some sort of claim, unless they are just nitpicking). One is claiming that they remember a study — pretty vague, and easily proven (as far as we can tell at least) by just showing us any study. The other is claiming that that study doesn’t replicate… without having seen it, which seems like a pretty high bar to clear.

solveit3y ago

Most studies in this reference class (social science) don't replicate, so I'm fine with that being the default assumption.

bee_rider3y ago

It is hard to speculate without knowing much about the original poster or the types of studies they read. Maybe they prefer “Nature Human Behavior,” who knows?

PartiallyTyped3y ago

I can offer [1-3] in support of my position.

[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.440

[2] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620924051

[3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617736887

bee_rider3y ago

One sort of annoying thing about this site is that it seems to be convention to ask for sources, but conversations quickly fall off the front page and so when you come back with the sources, nobody is left to respond! But this looks at least to me to be some good stuff, the second link appears to be at least somewhat of a replication.

joshuamorton3y ago

And the claim in this case is "it does not replicate".

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

bee_rider3y ago· 4 in thread

I’ve in general grown somewhat averse to the “burden of proof points in some direction” line of thinking.

They are both making claims. (And I think usually most people are making some sort of claim, unless they are just nitpicking). One is claiming that they remember a study — pretty vague, and easily proven (as far as we can tell at least) by just showing us any study. The other is claiming that that study doesn’t replicate… without having seen it, which seems like a pretty high bar to clear.

solveit3y ago

Most studies in this reference class (social science) don't replicate, so I'm fine with that being the default assumption.

bee_rider3y ago

It is hard to speculate without knowing much about the original poster or the types of studies they read. Maybe they prefer “Nature Human Behavior,” who knows?

PartiallyTyped3y ago

I can offer [1-3] in support of my position.

[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.440

[2] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620924051

[3] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617736887

bee_rider3y ago

One sort of annoying thing about this site is that it seems to be convention to ask for sources, but conversations quickly fall off the front page and so when you come back with the sources, nobody is left to respond! But this looks at least to me to be some good stuff, the second link appears to be at least somewhat of a replication.

joshuamorton3y ago

And the claim in this case is "it does not replicate".

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse