41–42 of 42 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's seems highly likely that Ariely did it, not the company.
Why do you say that?
I think the original blog post [0] or Andrew Gelman's discussion of it [1] are both better sources for technical details and some historical context. In particular, this is not the first such issue for Dan Ariely, as Gelman points out, he has a history of sketchy scientific ethics like doing media tours for studies that he knows failed to replicate. [0] http://datacolada.org/98 [1] https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.…
The datacolada post makes the very reasonable request that all data should be released, and scientists should make that a standard thing to do by doing it themselves and requesting others do it. It feels like this could be applied retroactively too. In this case the 2012 authors still had the data that they released in 2020 which is how the analysis got done that showed evidence of fraud. Might be worth just asking a…