Hi Gayle et al-
I believe that the larger point of the video is publication bias - studies with negative or no results are not as likely to be published as those clearly show a relationship. This is an issue in social science. As a field we may be more likely to publish alternative explanations (where a different variable has a relationship with an outcome of interest) than a study showing no relationship where one has previously been established/published.
(ps The speaker says he is an epidemiologist, in addition to being a comedian)
__
Mark Clark, Assoc Professor
Kogod School of Business, American University
Washington, DC (202) 885-1873
www.american.edu/kogod/faculty/maclark.cfm INGRoup 2012 July 12-14 in Chicago!
www.ingroup.net/conference.html------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:58:16 -0500
From: Gayle Baugh <
gbaugh@UWF.EDU>
Subject: Re: Comfortable in our delusions
Very funny, Michael. But you know something? We're not medical
researchers. And we don't shield real results from "dayllight" in the way
that the "comedian" suggested. And finally, we don't do the same type of
research. So what was the point? If I'm ever funded by a drug company,
I'll be very careful. But what else? I'm not really getting it. -- Gayle
Gayle Baugh
Associate Professor
Co-Editor, Research in Careers Series
published by Information Age Publishing
Associate Editor, Group & Organization
Management
Department of Management & MIS
University of West Florida
11000 University Parkway
Pensacola, Florida 32514-5752
(850) 474-2206 (Office)
(850) 474-2314 (FAX)
gbaugh@uwf.edu