• AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      And even psychology is extremely dubious. Just look at the recent Stanford scandal, and the replication crisis a few year ago…

      Unfortunately, publication pressure turned psychology into total junk. You can’t really believe anything unless several other institutions replicated the experiments (and good luck getting funding for that).

      • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t really believe anything unless several other institutions replicated the experiments (and good luck getting funding for that.)

        Shouldn’t that be the case with every scientific discipline?

    • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I mean, define experimental?

      Daniel Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel prize in economics for his research on the psychology of judgement and decision making, which drives our economic models. He’s a psychologist.

      Any definition of experimental that fits psychology will fit economics.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sociology is an actual science with a methodology and it tries to learn from other sciences.

      Economy considers it pure like maths despite the evidences it is not the case.

      Economy is pseudo-science at its best.

      • Teppic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Economy` is pseudo-science at its best.

        This sentence doesn’t even make sense.
        Econometrics is highly research driven and evidence based. In it’s simplest form econometrics says if you put prices down you will (usually) sell more of your product. You’d dismiss this observation as pseudo-science?