Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://rollenspiel.social/users/ArneBab/statuses/113441647235241242">Arne Babenhauserheide (arnebab@rollenspiel.social)'s status on Thursday, 07-Nov-2024 21:24:48 JST</a><a href="https://rollenspiel.social/@ArneBab" title="arnebab@rollenspiel.social"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/8121-48-20230128222518.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Arne Babenhauserheide" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Arne Babenhauserheide</a><div><a href="https://rollenspiel.social/@ArneBab/113441615319154818" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://hostsharing.coop/@dzu">@dzu</a> The comment by Peter Woits shows one aspect that got me to stop watching Sabines Videos: clickbaity, outrage-driving algorithm peddling.</p><p>I’ve already written about problems in years ago, e.g. that the incentives given by scientific institutions are problematic¹ and that scientific communication is breaking down as it does not adjust to the massively rising number of scientists,² but Sabine’s takes harm trust in robust scientific results.</p><p>¹ <a href="https://www.draketo.de/english/science/quality-assurance" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.draketo.de/english/science/quality-assurance</a><br>² <a href="https://www.draketo.de/english/science/challenges-scientific-publishing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.draketo.de/english/science/challenges-scientific-publishing</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/3916479#notice-7727582">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-11-07T21:24:48+09:00" title="Thursday, 07-Nov-2024 21:24:48 JST">about 7 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://rollenspiel.social/@ArneBab/113441647235241242" rel="external" title="Sent from rollenspiel.social via ActivityPub">rollenspiel.social</a></span></span><a href="https://rollenspiel.social/@ArneBab/113441647235241242">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.draketo.de</div><h5><a href="https://www.draketo.de/english/science/quality-assurance">counting scientific publications as metric for scientific quality is dumb | Zwillingssterns Weltenwald | 1w6</a></h5><div> from <span>Arne Babenhauserheide</span></div></header><div>So, 11/19/2017 - 11:35 — Draketo Scientific institutions1 currently base a large part of their internal evaluation, their comparison to others, and their hiring decisions on counting publication (with a number of different scorings). And this is dumb. On the surface this causes pressure to publish as many papers as possible2 which drives down quality of publications... 1w6</div><footer></footer></article></li><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.draketo.de</div><h5><a href="https://www.draketo.de/english/science/challenges-scientific-publishing">Information challenges for scientific publishing | Zwillingssterns Weltenwald | 1w6</a></h5><div> from <span>Arne Babenhauserheide</span></div></header><div>Fr, 08/28/2015 - 20:54 — Draketo On 2015-08-27, Researchers from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology reported that in 100 reproduction studies, only “47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size” (RPP SCIENCE 2015, an overview of the results is available in Scientific American; in german from DLF Forschung A... 1w6</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Arne Babenhauserheide (arnebab@rollenspiel.social)'s status on Thursday, 07-Nov-2024 21:24:48 JSTArne Babenhauserheide
in reply to
- Detlev Zundel
@dzu The comment by Peter Woits shows one aspect that got me to stop watching Sabines Videos: clickbaity, outrage-driving algorithm peddling.
I’ve already written about problems in years ago, e.g. that the incentives given by scientific institutions are problematic¹ and that scientific communication is breaking down as it does not adjust to the massively rising number of scientists,² but Sabine’s takes harm trust in robust scientific results.
¹ https://www.draketo.de/english/science/quality-assurance
² https://www.draketo.de/english/science/challenges-scientific-publishing
In conversationabout 7 months ago from rollenspiel.socialpermalink
Attachments
1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.draketo.de
  counting scientific publications as metric for scientific quality is dumb | Zwillingssterns Weltenwald | 1w6
  from Arne Babenhauserheide
  So, 11/19/2017 - 11:35 — Draketo Scientific institutions1 currently base a large part of their internal evaluation, their comparison to others, and their hiring decisions on counting publication (with a number of different scorings). And this is dumb. On the surface this causes pressure to publish as many papers as possible2 which drives down quality of publications... 1w6
2. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.draketo.de
  Information challenges for scientific publishing | Zwillingssterns Weltenwald | 1w6
  from Arne Babenhauserheide
  Fr, 08/28/2015 - 20:54 — Draketo On 2015-08-27, Researchers from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology reported that in 100 reproduction studies, only “47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size” (RPP SCIENCE 2015, an overview of the results is available in Scientific American; in german from DLF Forschung A... 1w6

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice