this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
894 points (97.7% liked)

Comic Strips

20752 readers
3212 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

the entire purpose of the article is to present their work, data, & findings (ie, evidence).

I know, that that is the claim, that's what I'm attacking. They're garbage at doing this. There is no agreed upon standard of doing it. and because they are so utterly shit at it, all that is left is the appeal to authority, because "our methodology works".

(And if I'm wrong, point me to the template and standard formatting that was agreed upon. Show me the standardized procedures that meta analysis studies have to pass to be considered "acceptable".)

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

They’re garbage at doing this. There is no agreed upon standard of doing it. and because they are so utterly shit at it, all that is left is the appeal to authority, because “our methodology works”.

Not really: most research of any credibility openly shares its data either upfront or on request. The argument isn't "I did this right, trust me, bro", it's "here's my methods & data supporting my analysis & conclusions: check for yourself or even redo it all". Reproducibility (verification of findings) & replicability (same findings with new data) is the standard: once that's done (researchers can communicate to clear up methods or miscommunication), the issues to do that had been cleared up & don't really matter anymore.

A meta-analysis takes in a body of independent studies that replicate findings & analyzes them together to reproduce results, so it addresses both standards.