Hi See
http://www.nature.com/news/psychologists-strike-a-blow-for-reproducibility-1.14232 I'm not convinced of the need for such explicit efforts, assuming that scientific psychology does value replication and meta-analyses. After all, who's to say whether the non-reproduced effects in this study were "correct" or the original studies that found effects? If I wanted to improve scientific psychology and its public image, I would encourage journals to report small empirical studies without grandiose theorizing (with or without statistically significant effects) and ban the use of University public relations departments from disseminating the results of single studies in press releases, no matter how "newsworthy" the results might appear to be. Take care Jim Jim Clark Professor & Chair of Psychology 204-786-9757 4L41A --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=30837 or send a blank email to leave-30837-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
