Post ASddGfRQU2I3GP4yem by scott_bot@hcommons.social
 (DIR) More posts by scott_bot@hcommons.social
 (DIR) Post #ASdb4vDxmGsgpW3OEq by scott_bot@hcommons.social
       2023-02-13T12:26:46Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Inspired by my previous two boosts, on "adversarial collaboration" (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268577) and "adversarial review" (https://themarkup.org/hello-world/2023/02/04/journalistic-lessons-for-the-algorithmic-age), I'll share my preferred methodology for hypothesis-driven research, which I suppose can be called "adversarial triangulation":When I have a strong hunch, I design a hypothesis that is maximally likely to refute it. If it doesn't, I do the same thing again with a different angle of observation and a different method. If it still hasn't been refuted, I do the same thing *again* before I'm finally convinced. If any of it involves Bayesian stats, I use an informed-but-unfriendly prior.If you want to be sure your pre-conceptions don't inadvertently tug your results, you could do worse than stacking the deck against your beliefs while using three different approaches that rely on different types of observations.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASdb4vxL3ZB36FHcxs by scott_bot@hcommons.social
       2023-02-13T12:36:08Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       ⬆️ This is a sure-fire approach to publish rarely and well, which is bad career advice and won't get you tenure in the fields this approach is most relevant. Which is a problem.If we're to believe the recently-controversial John Ioannidis that "most published research findings are false" (and two decades of evidence suggests we should believe him, in this limited capacity), that includes stuff you and I want to publish.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASdb4wWmvlX8sBrwDg by RebeccaSpang@cursoryreview.org
       2023-02-13T13:02:47Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @scott_bot “Publish rarely and well” may be bad career advice but it’s also been my mantra
       
 (DIR) Post #ASdb4x3kxBuAWRIGbg by scott_bot@hcommons.social
       2023-02-13T13:01:22Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       (now wearing my humanities hat)My humanities colleagues understandably won't see much relevance in these toots, but we'd also benefit from more self-adversarial approaches when knowledge-making. Our hermeneutic processes aren't exactly immune from confirmation bias, even if we're usually more open about our situatedness.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASdb4xLpryMnQVkhmq by TedUnderwood@sigmoid.social
       2023-02-13T13:10:45Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @RebeccaSpang @scott_bot I’d never recommend publishing badly :)   Caution is always good. But I think there’s a curve across career stages; as you get more senior it’s more advantageous to be choosy and less useful to publish lots of minor contributions.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASddGfRQU2I3GP4yem by scott_bot@hcommons.social
       2023-02-13T13:35:15Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @TedUnderwood @RebeccaSpang It's also, thankfully, more acceptable in (some corners and career stages of) the humanities. A sign of erudition rather than inefficiency.
       
 (DIR) Post #ASdjfQDSpKPv0Yjfai by jose_eduardo@mastodon.social
       2023-02-13T14:47:00Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @TedUnderwood @RebeccaSpang @scott_bot but as a senior researcher one has also made a lot of friends along the way and sometimes they ask one to contribute to their projects and ...it is hard to say no...