Group items tagged

How do statistics so often lead scientists to deny differences that those not educated in statistics can plainly see? For several generations, researchers have been warned that a statistically non-significant result does not 'prove' the null hypothesis (the hypothesis that there is no difference between groups or no effect of a treatment on some measured outcome)1. Nor do statistically significant results 'prove' some other hypothesis. Such misconceptions have famously warped the literature with overstated claims and, less famously, led to claims of conflicts between studies where none exists.

This essay investigates detrimental thinking patterns about the future, termed futures fallacies. It is based on an analysis of the existing literature and personal observation. I define futures fallacies in three ways. First, as those thinking patterns that stand in direct contradiction to a truly desired longer-term future. Second, as thoughts and behaviours that are contrary to our best existing evidence, facts, and logic, of relevance to emerging futures. Third, as cognitive frames that ensure chosen strategies fail.

team of researchers from the NYU Abu Dhabi's (NYUAD) Smart Materials Lab (SML) led by Professor of Chemistry Panče Naumov has conducted a thorough review of the scientific literature surrounding the natural production of light, called bioluminescence, and developed conclusions that will help others in the field direct their research to uncover the mysteries behind this fascinating natural phenomenon.

Researchers at Poland's Institute of Nuclear Physics found complex 'fractal' patterning of sentences in literature, particularly in James Joyce's Finnegans Wake, which resemble 'ideal' maths seen in nature