Wait, There Isn’t a Scientific Method?

Science journalist Tom Siegfried on the misuse of statistical methods in science: “It’s science’s dirtiest secret: The ‘scientific method’ of testing hypotheses by statistical analysis stands on a flimsy foundation. Statistical tests are supposed to guide scientists in judging whether an experimental result reflects some real effect or is merely a random fluke, but the standard methods mix mutually inconsistent philosophies and offer no meaningful basis for making such decisions. Even when performed correctly, statistical tests are widely misunderstood and frequently misinterpreted. As a result, countless conclusions in the scientific literature are erroneous, and tests of medical dangers or treatments are often contradictory and confusing.”

Related articles

• Science and the Shortcomings of Statistics (science.slashdot.org)
• Data driven science revisited (mndoci.com)
• OK, OK. If four people email me about something, I’ll blog on it. (stat.columbia.edu)
• Vast majority of published research claims may be false (3quarksdaily.com)