![]() ![]() To avoid perpetrating this form of data fraud (and reduce positive-results bias to boot), some journals and funding organizations are now requiring researchers to preregister their clinical trials, stating in advance what hypotheses they are going to be testing. 1 day ago &0183 &32 The 'Dredging Global Market Report 2023' report has been added to s offering. forms of data dredging could also produce a similar distribution.12 13 Despite remaining uncertainties, there is no dispute that the bias intro-duced by data dredging will be most severe where the effect size is small, the dependent measures are imprecise, research designs are flexible and studies are conducted on small samples. The lesson here is this: beware of so-called “statistically significant” results. ![]() Such ex post results, however, are often just spurious correlations. In the words of Wikipedia: “The process of data dredging involves automatically testing huge numbers of hypotheses about a single data set by exhaustively searching … for combinations of variables that might show a correlation ….” This form of data fraud thus occurs when researchers perform multiple statistical tests on a single set of data and then selectively publish only those results that satisfy some test of statistical significance. Let’s proceed with our parade of fraudulent data practices, shall we? Next up is data dredging (a/k/a “p-hacking”), a more sophisticated (and less transparent) form of cherry picking. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |