How scientists fool themselves - and how they can stop.

作者信息

Nuzzo Regina

出版信息

Nature. 2015 Oct 8;526(7572):182-5. doi: 10.1038/526182a.

DOI:10.1038/526182a

PMID:26450039

Abstract

摘要

相似文献

[1]

How scientists fool themselves - and how they can stop.

Nature. 2015-10-8

[2]

Blind analysis: Hide results to seek the truth.

Nature. 2015-10-8

[3]

Research protocols: A forest of hypotheses.

Nature. 2016-8-11

[4]

How scientists can stop fooling themselves over statistics.

Nature. 2020-8

[5]

Let's think about cognitive bias.

Nature. 2015-10-8

[6]

Academia must resist political confirmation bias.

Nature. 2016-11-29

[7]

Reliability and validity in research.

Nurs Stand. 2006

[8]

Case study: design? Method? Or comprehensive strategy?

Nurse Res. 2004

[9]

Race as a variable in cross-cultural research.

Nurs Outlook. 2003

[10]

"Are we in Kansas yet, Toto?" The construction of chronic illness in research.

Can J Nurs Res. 2000-12

引用本文的文献

[1]

Describing the landscape of nutrition- and diet-related randomized controlled trials: metaresearch study of protocols published between 2012 and 2022.

Am J Clin Nutr. 2025-4

[2]

Reporting Standards for Bayesian Network Modelling.

Entropy (Basel). 2025-1-15

[3]

Decisions, Decisions, Decisions: An Ethnographic Study of Researcher Discretion in Practice.

Sci Eng Ethics. 2024-11-29

[4]

Investigating the links between questionable research practices, scientific norms and organisational culture.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2024-10-14

[5]

Ten simple rules for building and maintaining a responsible data science workflow.

PLoS Comput Biol. 2024-7-18

[6]

Addressing researcher degrees of freedom through minP adjustment.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024-7-17

[7]

Impact of redefining statistical significance on P-hacking and false positive rates: An agent-based model.

PLoS One. 2024

[8]

Understanding Individual Subject Differences through Large Behavioral Datasets: Analytical and Statistical Considerations.

Perspect Behav Sci. 2023-9-11

[9]

To adjust or not to adjust: it is not the tests performed that count, but how they are reported and interpreted.

BMJ Med. 2024-4-12

[10]

Ethical Principles in Plastic Surgery Research.

Semin Plast Surg. 2024-2-8

本文引用的文献

[1]

Does Incidental Disgust Amplify Moral Judgment? A Meta-Analytic Review of Experimental Evidence.

Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015-7

[2]

The effect of horizontal eye movements on free recall: a preregistered adversarial collaboration.

J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015-2

[3]

Interactions of multisensory components perceptually rescue túngara frog mating signals.

Science. 2013-6-6

[4]

Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling.

Psychol Sci. 2012-4-16

[5]

Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research.

Nature. 2012-3-28

[6]

Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses.

Nat Genet. 2009-2

[7]

Strong Inference: Certain systematic methods of scientific thinking may produce much more rapid progress than others.

Science. 1964-10-16

[8]

Multiple sudden infant deaths -- coincidence or beyond coincidence?

Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2004-9

[9]

Theory and data interactions of the scientific mind: evidence from the molecular and the cognitive laboratory.

Can J Exp Psychol. 2004-6

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述，助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

新学期，新优惠

How scientists fool themselves - and how they can stop.

作者信息

出版信息

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

用中文搜PubMed

推荐工具

Suppr 超能文献

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献