Science: So What? Commissioning and promoting bad research in the name of science communications

Updated 1 month, 3 weeks ago

Source: http://evidencematters.org/

Science: So What? and BIS commission and promote poor quality research

  • 7 comments on this story
PRO

50% positive

Showing 5 relevant reactions out of 7.

Some blogging on @scienceSoWhat and @fastfuture http://bit.ly/6gxrdGhttp://bit.ly/5atNQfhttp://bit.ly/4Cwl8Thttp://bit.ly/732DDA

1 month, 3 weeks ago by gimpyblog on Twitter

[...] Despite positive media coverage this report has come under some criticism, as detailed by Evidence Matters, for its methodology, inappropriate job descriptions and inadequate references.  In addition to [...]

1 month, 3 weeks ago by Science So What – better at headlines than science « gimpy’s blog on Wordpress

[...] social scientist’s review of the report finds that: the methodologies used are inadequate and poorly implemented; some of the [...]

1 month, 3 weeks ago by BIS and Science: So What’s definition of “rigorous and credible” research « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science on Wordpress

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by brainduck: http://ow.ly/ZiZ5 @James_Hayton, http://ow.ly/Zj3e @EvidenceMatters debunk stupid ‘future jobs’ report by @fastfuture for @ScienceSoWhat…

1 month, 3 weeks ago by uberVU - social comments on Wordpress

http://ow.ly/ZiZ5 @James_Hayton, http://ow.ly/Zj3e @EvidenceMatters debunk stupid 'future jobs' report by @fastfuture for @ScienceSoWhat

1 month, 4 weeks ago by brainduck on Twitter

© uberVU Ltd. 2010

Terms of use
FEEDBACK