Live data from Hacker News

An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

psychologytoday.com

51–60 of 165 posts

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#51

I am from a third-world religious country and I'd just like to take this chance to say that religion should be classified as a mental disorder. I see the effects of it first hand, severely crippling the potential of individuals and entire cultures. There's nothing it offers that can't be taught by basic morals which don't require you to appease an imaginary entity or repress the human spirit. Even the leaders of reli…

While I'm an atheist and agree with you in part, I don't see how that's related to this story.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#53
post #39

From the article: Although Decety’s paper had reported that they had controlled for country, they had accidentally not controlled for each country, but just treated it as a single continuous variable so that, for example “Canada” (coded as 2) was twice the “United States” (coded as 1). I mean I don't even understand how this seemed like a normal thing to do?

Simple...data representation is not the same as data meaning. I teach an introductory stats course and we hammer this in. Categorical data are often represented as numbers or other short indicators for storage purposes. Typically I fmultiple choice the encoding is by the order of the choice options. I not infrequently see average of gender because male = 0 and female = 1 or vice versa and someone generates a table wi…

The bigger issue here seems to be the use of ordinals in the data collection process. For instance, a lot of my CSVs don't have them and R and pandas are perfectly capable of enumerating. Why do you even need to put ordinals in the dataset? Does excel want this sort of thing or something?

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#54
post #42

I think it's situations like this that result in society having such a hard time with 'science'. The term has been so heavily co-opted by fields that just don't have sufficient rigger for the term to hold weight. Yet, on various topics, we have this publicized attack of "your a science denier!". At the end of the day, there are two 'types' of science, one where I can take the results and make accurate predictions, an…

Perhaps the real problem is that reality does not punish being wrong and reward being right enough.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#55
post #42

I think it's situations like this that result in society having such a hard time with 'science'. The term has been so heavily co-opted by fields that just don't have sufficient rigger for the term to hold weight. Yet, on various topics, we have this publicized attack of "your a science denier!". At the end of the day, there are two 'types' of science, one where I can take the results and make accurate predictions, an…

That's not the problem here.

A statistical error was made, published, and then corrected.

That's possible in physics, chemistry, or biology just as well.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#56

Psychology, sociology and theology (and more logys?) was never meant to be sciences. We can blame the enlightenment for that idea, let’s revert them back to renaissance activities

There's too much power in them being considered sciences, which is why they'll remain that way.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#57

I am from a third-world religious country and I'd just like to take this chance to say that religion should be classified as a mental disorder. I see the effects of it first hand, severely crippling the potential of individuals and entire cultures. There's nothing it offers that can't be taught by basic morals which don't require you to appease an imaginary entity or repress the human spirit. Even the leaders of reli…

While I'm an atheist and agree with you in part, I don't see how that's related to this story.

There aren't many discussions about religion on HN but a topic related to it should prompt some, and I have no other outlet. Reddit isn't a very good place for it either.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#58

Psychology, sociology and theology (and more logys?) was never meant to be sciences. We can blame the enlightenment for that idea, let’s revert them back to renaissance activities

Psychology and sociology can be made as rigorous as individuals & institutions care to.

Theology, not so much.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#59
post #50
post #34

Sometimes I feel weird coding zip codes as strings but this is a great example why. If my program ever treats a zip code like a number I would like it to throw an error. At least in this case the error looks like an accident. On topic, from yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21067764 It's another social sciences paper but in this case a co-author has requested a retraction over his strong belief that the…

> If my program ever treats a zip code like a number I would like it to throw an error. One interesting thing you can do though, is sort by zipcode. This sorts your mail from East to West in the US. You can use that as a rough estimate of shipping time.

So? You make sure the zip code is left zero filled and the strings sort fine. Admittedly, numbers would sort a bit faster.

Re: An erroneous paper on religion and generosity is retracted

#60

Releasing your data should be a requirement for publication. If the original author had wanted to keep this a secret he could've withheld his data and nobody would've been able to correct him, there simply would've been discrepant studies.

I see where you're coming from, but would the subjects be comfortable with all their data becoming public?
Post reply on HN