There is currently what is being described as a “crisis” in the field of social/personality psychology. It turns out, many psychological experiments, however heralded in the media and whose findings are made a big deal of, cannot be replicated by other researchers. Is that due to fraud? Statistical quirks? Or does it mean that psychology is not a science after all?
From sometimes i’m wrong: Guest Post by John Doris:
At this writing, social psychology is being shaken by charges that many published findings, including numerous iconic findings, do not replicate when tested by independent investigators. Cyberspace is thick with skirmishes between Replicators, who broadcast the failed replications, and Finders, who insist that their findings are real. Viewed from a safe distance, it’s all good fun, the sort of academic kerfuffle that makes for diverting reads in those corners of the media where academic kerfuffles get covered. Unfortunately, I’m not at safe distance. Here, as elsewhere, I’ve repurposed psychological findings in philosophical argumentation. Awkward for me, if the findings are false.