Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Lounge
General Discussion
"Expected Result" Bias in Research
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Ygggdrasil, post: 6443217, member: 124113"] This all makes sense by approaching the problem from the perspective of [URL='https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/how-bayesian-inference-works-in-the-context-of-science/']Bayes theorem[/URL]. According to Bayes theorem, the confidence you have in a hypothesis ##H## given a set of observations ##O##, ##p(H|O)##, is the product of two quantities the strength of the evidence, ##p(O|H)/p(O)##, and the prior probability of the hypothesis being correct, ##p(H)##: $$p(H|O) = \frac{p(O|H)}{p(O)}p(H)$$ For gauge readings that make sense (i.e. those which confirm your prior beliefs), you don't need very strong evidence in favor of those hypotheses for you to believe them. However, if a reading goes against your prior beliefs and supports a hypothesis with a low prior probability, you would want much stronger evidence (e.g. more repeats of the experiment and independent sources of evidence) to convince you that the alternative hypothesis with a low prior is correct. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
The Lounge
General Discussion
"Expected Result" Bias in Research
Back
Top