I thought of a bit of a whacky proposal a few months ago. I think that we could pay professors in binary options which payout only if the research replicates. If you produce work that is shoddy, then your options will fall drastically in price.
The political asymmetry is self-reinforcing and is likely to get worse. A lot of researchers hold findings that conform to their ideology to a lower standard. The solution might be Open Science.
Lol, our trade union would hate that idea! But seriously, we do need bold new ideas - the Guardian article (linked in the piece) gives food for thought...
Good to see commentary like this from an academic. Many of the social sciences papers I see (via weekly roundups from Psypost) are obviously politically motivated.
An example this week was some analysis of ‘extreme’ speech that arises in online epistemic bubbles. Predictably they looked at far right and incel spaces. I am still to see any studies of the violent language in trans activist spaces.
As well as obvious political bias the other aspect that leaps out is quality. Another paper sought to examine the role of the female orgasm in enduring relationships. The subjects of the study were college students. Also known as kids.
Your piece uncovers some of the dynamics afoot here and I’m grateful for that.
Ventures like the University of Austin are useful and interesting, but I think that the best hope is the reform of existing institutions! The costs for new entrants seem too high...
Nice! Love to see this issue getting attention.
I thought of a bit of a whacky proposal a few months ago. I think that we could pay professors in binary options which payout only if the research replicates. If you produce work that is shoddy, then your options will fall drastically in price.
The political asymmetry is self-reinforcing and is likely to get worse. A lot of researchers hold findings that conform to their ideology to a lower standard. The solution might be Open Science.
Lol, our trade union would hate that idea! But seriously, we do need bold new ideas - the Guardian article (linked in the piece) gives food for thought...
I go back to this, the academic hoax pulled by James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlqU_JMTzd4&t=833s
That was sobering, but affected quite a narrow range of (pretty eccentric) fields.
Yes, gender studies ... within Sociology and Humanities at liberal arts colleges.
Good to see commentary like this from an academic. Many of the social sciences papers I see (via weekly roundups from Psypost) are obviously politically motivated.
An example this week was some analysis of ‘extreme’ speech that arises in online epistemic bubbles. Predictably they looked at far right and incel spaces. I am still to see any studies of the violent language in trans activist spaces.
As well as obvious political bias the other aspect that leaps out is quality. Another paper sought to examine the role of the female orgasm in enduring relationships. The subjects of the study were college students. Also known as kids.
Your piece uncovers some of the dynamics afoot here and I’m grateful for that.
Thanks! It's a fascinating topic. The very politically motivated postmodernist articles are the worst cases!
Time to re-build. E.g., the new University of Austin.
Ventures like the University of Austin are useful and interesting, but I think that the best hope is the reform of existing institutions! The costs for new entrants seem too high...
But if it’s true that there’s no solution to the credibility of existing institutions...