Eine große Verbundstudie stellt eine geringe analytische Robustheit in den Sozial- und Verhaltenswissenschaften fest, wobei nur 34 % der Neuanalysen die gleichen Ergebnisse wie die Originalberichte lieferten.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09844-9
6 Kommentare
It would be interesting to see if someone replicated this study would they reach the same conclusion..
Would there be a correlation between analytical robustness and funding?
[removed]
so just to understand, it means the same date, when used by different people, yields different conclusions? and only 34% agree? wow … what would that mean if it is true? are these sciences then unreliable? not even better than speculation?
Single subject designs are much better but logistically difficult when trying to get medicines to market so pharma can profit.
We should stop calling them “soft sciences”, it does a disservice to actual real science.