• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

When Government Propaganda Masquerades as Science

Octarine

The Eighth Colour
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,351
MBTI Type
Aeon
Enneagram
10w
Instinctual Variant
so
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...hen-government-propaganda-masquerades-science

Five years ago, Maryland psychologist Ed Pigott read the first published results of the NIMH's large STAR*D study of antidepressants and depression. However, even as he read that first article, he got the sense that "significant researcher trickery was afoot." Since then he has systematically exposed the trickery, piece by piece.

His latest article on the study, "STAR*D: A Tale and Trail of Bias," has just been published in Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry. He is also now blogging about his findings on madinamerica.com, and has posted documents there that he relied upon in his "deconstruction" of the $35 million study.

Here is the (scientific) review: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/springer/ehpp/2011/00000013/00000001/art00002

I've seen this same sort of thing in other recently published psychiatry studies. It seems that protocols are worthless if one is going to not follow it and fudge ones findings as much as possible (eg accept much looser clinical thresholds, not publish half of your measures and use looser p values than stated in your published protocol).
 
Top