"Honesty" Researcher CAUGHT Faking Studies

Follow the money…

 

That's absurd to say that you can't rely on any study.

 

The study investigates "whether signing an honesty declaration at the top of a form rather than the bottom made people behave more honestly."

I for one would never take part in such a fraudulent scheme for mere dollars.

Signed,
dave_the_thinker

 

Silly stance. It sounds an awful lot like the Republicans who claim we can't trust elections because of some isolated instances of voter fraud.

 

Some studies have to be taken with a grain of salt. For instance a climate study by a university may be questionable if it was funded by EXXON, or a false study claiming hundreds of thousands of people died from the Covid vaccine that was promoted by an anti-vaxxers group.

 

Science - whichever way the wind is blowing and who’s funding the studies.

BTW, this is exactly the point that RFK Jr is making and why the entrenched powerful/wealthy are attacking him.

 

In the Maher interview I watched, Kennedy said he believes in science, and he was touting having more scientific studies which support his positions. So he embraces scientific studies but argues that the other side of the debate is lying about the numbers and results of those studies. He could be wrong about that, too. I haven't read them. But that's very different to me than questioning the validity of all studies based upon potential fraud found in one.

 

People believe science when their life is at stake but rarely when their money is at stake.

 

In my way of thinking there are studies which are valid because they prove what they purport to prove and there are studies which are valid because they fail to prove what they purport to prove. It’s why I tender isolation studies to prove that viruses have never been isolated.

 

I looked but did not see as to whether these papers were peer reviewed? Maybe these don't get peer reviewed? I do not know, just asking.

 

Lol... It's not uncommon for these titles to be dishonest in nature. "Fact checkers" are notorious for lying to us about the real facts.

"Ministry of truth" is one big propaganda tool... Anytime these so called "honesty" titles are giving you know it's propaganda.

 

Rick, this has nothing to do with factcheckers.

 

It has to do with fake names that try to create content to deceive us... just like fackcheckers do. But if you want to narrowly focus in on that we can all go back a say this about virtually every single thread started in the forum.

You know that kind of narrow focus never lasts here.

Every subject has a category and this one is no different.

 

Peer-review is an old boy’s club.

 

One of the issues the reporter pointed out was the difficulty in replicating results, which probably tripped flags, and promoted the scrutiny of the underlying data.

So apparently yes, but reluctance to own the failure to replicate, bc she had collaborated with so many established, respected names in the field.

Peer review seems...negotiable, when there's so much incestuous deference to the objects of review.

 

This issue is a problem and it seems particularly acute for particular “journals” - especially those that are online only. When an author’s name and affiliation appears in a reputable journal, they will receive solicitations from the iffy journals inviting the author to submit other articles and all but guaranteeing acceptance and publication. My agency kept a list of these journals and we were strongly encouraged to look elsewhere. There must be money in it. I still receive these type communications 4+ years post retirement

 

Well I’m confused. How do I trust a study saying studies can’t be trusted?