3. Across many scientific fields, roughly half of the research findings established over the past century – hundreds of thousands of results – might simply be untrue, and the rest might me much less important than previously thought. At the same time, more and more people trying to find the scientific literature themselves to interpret it. This seems like an interesting combination, which I discuss with philosoper of science Remco Heesen.

Timeline

03:00 What does a (single) scientific study reporting a "significant result" tell you?

06:00 The replication crisis

09:00 The holy grail of science: the p-value (or: how most scientists think about evidence and what you can conclude from it)

13:00 P-hacking

15:00 Why whether some study's result is (probably) Really True, depends on doing only study at a time

19:00 Salami publishing and wrong economic and reputational incentives in the academic publication and career systems

25:00 Solutions: preregistration, publishing negative results, opening up peer review