Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

thobbs.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 158 posts

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#61

Post by stephencanon »

ars wrote: post #47
retrogradeorbit wrote: post #28

In a world were 47 of 53 landmark cancer research papers were found to not be replicable... where one scientist admitted (after the meta-researchers tried 50 times to replicate the result and failed) that they had run the experiment 6 times and got the result once and reported that because it made a better "story"... where the act of suppressing refutations of other's bogus research is "culturally commonplace"... Som…

> Something is rotten in the core of science. It's not science that is the problem. It's that biology considers a 95% confidence sufficient. Considering how many studies are done each year, this virtually guarantees incorrect results. The reason they do that is that it's impossible to get better results, they just can not do enough trials. So they are stuck.

95% confidence would be fine (or very nearly fine) if a requirement for funding/publication would be that all data, including negative results, be published as well.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#62

Post by ktizo »

retrogradeorbit wrote: post #28

In a world were 47 of 53 landmark cancer research papers were found to not be replicable... where one scientist admitted (after the meta-researchers tried 50 times to replicate the result and failed) that they had run the experiment 6 times and got the result once and reported that because it made a better "story"... where the act of suppressing refutations of other's bogus research is "culturally commonplace"... Som…

So from your example, ~10% contained really good information, and this was found using a meta study, conducted by scientists. And you are using that as an example of how you should give scientific research no weight at all? Why do you give weight to the scientific meta study if you think it means that you should not give weight to scientific studies in general? This position is pretty ridiculous on the face of it.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#63

Post by Zakharov »

r00fus wrote: post #7
VMG wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assumption is only that the article is based on a scientific study, not that it is omniscient.

A study that rigidly follows the scientific principles, but is intellectually dishonest (ie, sponsored by interested party of studied subject, etc) is often not useful to the reader of the study results. Because you can follow the letter of the principles, and still flout the spirit. One should, when listening to a study, question the funding. Likewise, dissenting opinions must also be examined in what interested par…

Yes, examining the biases and methodologies of a study is the correct way to present a contrarian opinion. Providing an anecdote is much less useful.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#64

Post by CookWithMe »

I'm all in when it comes to call bullshit on something. But because we (hackers) are used to boolean decisions, we are looking for counter-examples.

But these are just non-arguments when the finding is "In 9 out of 10 cases, ...". The anecdote is the 1 out of 10 case.

Let's try to question anything, and when it is suspicious - by all means, say so! But, I guess what the author is trying to say (beyond the whole Downvote discussion) is that we should try to reason and make a proper argument. Especially one that is not already addressed in the research.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#65

Post by JoeAltmaier »

derleth wrote: post #53
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An anecdote, if true, is a contrary example which can be useful. It can even disprove an absolute claim - it only takes one counterexample. In mathematics this is done all the time. Statistics are themselves misleading - there are whole books on the subject (oh no! an anecdote! better close your mind now). They are highly contextual, but the popular press excels are stripping that context and proclaiming absurd extre…

> oh no! an anecdote! better close your mind now Another idiotic strawman argument.

Forgot whimsy doesn't play on HN - too many literal thinkers. Sorry, I'll refrain.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#66

Post by polyfractal »

retrogradeorbit wrote: post #28

In a world were 47 of 53 landmark cancer research papers were found to not be replicable... where one scientist admitted (after the meta-researchers tried 50 times to replicate the result and failed) that they had run the experiment 6 times and got the result once and reported that because it made a better "story"... where the act of suppressing refutations of other's bogus research is "culturally commonplace"... Som…

This is utter hogwash.

I'm as critical as anyone (probably more so, check my comment history) of academic biology because of my background in it. There are certainly things wrong it. And due to the nature of biology, replicating results is really hard. It's a fact of life when you deal with systems that are not perfect, not identical and very opaque.

But to say that "Science has been supplanted by money and politics" is stretching the problems of biology into a mountain of conspiracy.

Furthermore, I'm reading your "source" and it reads loudly as "I'm an underfunded big-pharma research who has neither the time nor the resources to properly replicate studies". Did you know that most big pharma labs do not have access to the academic literature? They mostly read abstracts because there is little budget to actually purchase the required papers.

How much do you trust labs that are A) only trying to recreate data so they can make a drug out of it and B) aren't even reading the original data? While academic labs can have grad students toil away on hard experiemnts for literally years before they perfect them...how long do you think Pfizer or Merck or Glaxco-Smith is going to let their paid researchers fiddle away on a project that is probably low priority anyway?

Because, of course, the high-priority projects are the reformulations of penis-enlarging drugs or cholesterol medication...you know, the ones that actually make money.

If you are looking for snake oil and shady research, I dare you to read any research paper that comes out of big pharma labs. We would routinely read them just for laughs because they are (often) downright terrible.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#67

Post by sehugg »

Anecdotes have their place, especially in complex domains. For example, I have a friend who uses medical marijuana successfully to control MS symptoms. That is a sample size of one, but it certainly colors my view of the debate. I have a much deeper view into the decision making process of a MS sufferer now than I would otherwise, one that goes beyond spasticity, pain, and cognitive scores.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#68

Post by JoeAltmaier »

pgsandstrom wrote: post #57
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, thanks for deciding how gullible I am, and please do sanitize what I get to read for my own good. That's how open dialog works, right?

What do you think the voting system on HN does? It promotes good content, thus also demotes bad content. The author is saying "Here is a reason that content X is bad. If you agree with me, downvote it".

Doesn't make sense. If the content is 'bad', moderator could expunge it. Or writer could be counseled on giving better posts. Or any number of things.

The voting system on HN sometimes demotes bad content. Far more often (discussed widely elsewhere) its used to assert agreement or disagreement. When used in this sense, its a sort of instant-poll.

In the case of anecdotal argument, it forms an ad-hoc 'scientific' experiment. The HN population weighs in using their own experience. Those who's memory (or ok, memory-triggered emotion response) aligns with the author may upvote etc.

To 'bad content' is uniformely suppressed instead, this social experiment is lost, and the community loses. The merit of instant-polls is debatable, but other such polls are supported here. In fact the test group on HN may exceed the original 'scientific paper' group by an order of magnitude. Its statistical significance may exceed a graduate student's narrow study.

Re: You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes

#69

Post by JoeAltmaier »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #32
the_bear wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're suggesting that because some people are bad at weighing information, anything based on personal experience should be downvoted? Successful entrepreneurs should no longer give advice? Programmers shouldn't weigh in on programming issues unless they're citing third-party research? Marketers can't suggest tips for how to promote a startup because it's possible their methods aren't universally successful?

It's just not some people. It's everyone . Including you, me, and those who know about the various failure modes. And please don't straw man me. Personal experience is mostly great. Successful entrepreneurs may have better decision making processes, not just more luck. Programming issues should be weighted on, since there are so little reliable studies here, and the field is so young. Etc. I was just talking about th…

Disagree. Successful entrepreneurs are lottery winners with attitude, by and large. The programming field is no longer young, we should give up that old excuse. And no you are not being straw-manned, the argument is. Good to not take things personal here.

Studies are necessarily narrow and context-laden, even 'solid and definite' ones. The suggestion to automatically downvote anecdotes is too broad, and should be refuted.

Post reply on HN