tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5275657281509261156.post7707968452294835133..comments2024-03-28T04:04:55.806-07:00Comments on Faculty of Language: Bad Data; an addendumNorberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15701059232144474269noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5275657281509261156.post-8209956441252432432013-01-11T14:23:42.281-08:002013-01-11T14:23:42.281-08:00Well said, Norbert!Well said, Norbert!Berthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07377413808517284896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5275657281509261156.post-61629569161174466482013-01-11T06:49:06.784-08:002013-01-11T06:49:06.784-08:00Good question. I have personally been involved in ...Good question. I have personally been involved in some cases, but mainly at the reviewing process. Some papers seem subject to far more stringent requirements than others. This can often be attributed, in my view, to the views expressed and by the people expressing them. A decent example where very good work was nibbled to death is discussed in the Roediger and Arnold paper cited in 'Does anyone ever learn anything.' These subtle forms often block excellent ideas from emerging and being reasonably considered. <br /><br />Unpopular ideas face a very uphill battle. But it is impossible to simply say that there ideas are disliked. Rather, they fail to meet the requisite standards is the theme of choice. That's what I intended.Norberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15701059232144474269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5275657281509261156.post-56616976745473646682013-01-10T15:15:56.048-08:002013-01-10T15:15:56.048-08:00This is an interesting take on the Hauser affair. ...This is an interesting take on the Hauser affair. One question. You write "Of the scientific vices [irtuous self righteousness and envy] have often done more harm than deliberate fraud, let alone sloppiness." Can you give a couple of examples where that has happened? ThanksAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03443435257902276459noreply@blogger.com