When data is properly gathered and analyzed, statistics can be a powerful lens through which one can discern patterns and draw conclusions about our world. Yet, when we have preconceived notions of what our results “should” look like (or want them to look like), there might the temptation to “fudge” the numbers that gives us a “desirable” conclusion.
The article you’re about to read concerns a recent event involving a prominent food/nutrition scientist who was allegedly caught cooking the books.
You may find the article here:
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/09/26/651849441/cornell-food-researchers-downfall-raises-larger-questions-for-science
After reading the article, please answer the following questions:
1) The article mentions the idea of p-hacking. To the best of your ability, and in your own words, explain the meaning this term. (Special Note: You’re welcome to do a little more research on this idea before posting.)
2) Do you think that Wansink did anything wrong?
3) Do you think that Wansinks actions invalidate the ideas behind good statistical practice?
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]