Of course there's evidence

These last few weeks have been amusing for yet more failures to replicate (or just re-upping some other notable failures) in science. I expect some of these failures will themselves fail to replicate -- i.e. some flaw discovered -- and some future meta-analyses will try to pick up the pieces or attempt to synthesize or whatever. (Sometimes just pointing out inconsistencies is fine. There are two well-established methods to deal with overcoming traumas/phobias, but the original individual theories behind each would, if true, prohibit the other from working. There are more modern theories that can account for it, but it took people noticing.)

Some recent highlights (thanks to @hbdchick for hearing about many) include mere exposure effect not replicating, a bad history of hummingbird flap rates, vitamin D with/without calcium doesn't matter for bones, Alzheimer's research is bunk, no evidence for nudging, doubt on serotonin as a useful part of theory on depression (but some drugs still seem to work somehow sometimes anyway, so don't get too skeptical (but still skeptical and notice long term issues)).

An older highlight is around Koko the monkey. A lot of the flaws with Koko are repeated in small by so many published researchers, i.e. that there's just no data to even attempt an outside analysis or replication, here's another recent thread pointing this out.

See Full Post and Comments