Northernlion calls out the scientific method

[@marisa2555]

the stanford prison experiment is actually one of the most replicated experiments of all time. there are hundreds of gmod and tf2 jailbreak servers going on right now

[@misterjojo007]

+2

[@deejorno]

+2, veteran of many a tf2 jailbreak server and people's power fantasies

[@Veilure]

as someone with over 100 hours in tf2 jailbreak, it's actually pretty chill most of the time

[@dylzoe]

I mean you joke but I think researchers should definitely be using RP servers, etc. more often. That's a super easy way to find a decent sample size and willing participants

[@erfaniom9576]

i swear if you get him playing P.T. he's gonna run around that apartment forever, referencing tweets and not even realize that he's trapped in a never-ending cycle

[@Meowth666]

Powerful metaphor, really.

[@SapkaliAkif]

And we love him for that

[@ironickrempt]

@@SapkaliAkif We love him, don't we folks

[@Qiaoster]

one must imagine Sisyphus Aware

[@nicholasmccarthy8511]

Yeah that's why Konami pulled it

[@theburgercomic]

english is not my first language, so usually when i hear new words i just kind of believe that they're real. learning that decroded is not a real word is genuinely shocking to me and kinda embarrasing bcs i've been saying that shit

[@twingolord]

Don’t worry man. English is my first language and I just assumed it was a word too

[@duk3silver]

@@twingolord what does he use it for really i don't get it as well lol

[@twingolord]

@@duk3silver urbandictionary says its decrepid + corroded, and that its from napolean dynamite

[@lred1383]

linguist here, words being "real" depends solely on whether or not they're recognised by people and/or dictionaries. "Decroded", despite not having a clear etymology and a long lineage of other well recognised forms, is still fairly intuitive even to people who have never heard it, especially in context. This type of word formation is more common in synthetic languages, like the various Slavic languages, but English does experience it occasionally

[@29Mozay29]

Wait until you find out that every word in every language isn't a physical reality and that 100% of the time they are imagined and put into practice by a random ass person

[@Rembd]

A ton of papers on finance are just a dude picking convenient times to run a backest "Well if you just buy small cap tech companies in 1997 and hold them for 20 years with 3x leverage you'll generate a 35% CAGR. Yeah if you did this in Japan in the 80s you would have suffered a catastrophic lost but let's just pretend that didn't happen."

[@chucklesthelegend7305]

The urge to cherrypick is undeniable. That instinct doesn't just go away when you graduate college

[@H3110ification]

Fama and French been real quiet lately...

[@Illysi]

Stanford prison experiment shows everyone is corruptible with power. Except me, I would still be a good guy and am totally immune to that

[@holyyoghurtman1952]

we're good guys, of course we're incorruptible by absolute power

[@ruroruro]

Stanford prison experiment shows that everyone conducting sociology studies is corruptible by fame.

[@ehudshapira2745]

"Visions of my own Id carrying bladed weapons" He's the best to ever do it fr fr

[@SemiIocon]

Scientific method when heuristic process walks in: 😵

[@Zeffpenguin]

The replication crisis is genuinely a huge threat to modern science for exactly the reasons pointed out in this video

[@andrewch5030]

Replication scientist should absolutely be a job with how much value it could provide to society. He’s 100% on point with this

[@maximecomeau-gauthier4722]

@@andrewch5030 but it would not generate revenue or interest for financement on top of being very costly since you need the specific equipement/solutions/compounds of each individual experiments you want to validate Its probably not sustainable economicly by itself

[@benymitch]

3:23 NL just uncovering the basis for like, almost every Bobby Broccoli video

[@twingolord]

+2222

[@seabass8154]

Was about to post that

[@peace_n_love]

His point about not listening to the milgram experiment researchers is one of the main points of the study, whether people would listen to someone seemingly in a position of power. Also ironically it turned out that the majority did not keep pressing the button, so the researchers DID make up the numbers.

[@misterjojo007]

65% went to max voltage, that's very much a majority. The problem lies in the fact that the study had just 40 participants (all male), with 26 going to maximum voltage and 14 stopping at various points along the way, and also the inconsistent replicability among future studies and problems with generalizing to real world applications. I'd argue it's not as pseudo scientific as the Stanford Prison Experiment (though if nothing else that one at least posed a good question about situational influence on behavior).

[@handoverthestromboli6715]

Neo: Why does my diction hurt? Bisexual Northernlion: 2:01

[@SheerSniper7]

Bilingual Northernlion

[@ajheft789]

@@SheerSniper7bilingual northernlion be like bonjour to the gamers

[@laroete]

+2

[@handoverthestromboli6715]

​​​@@ajheft789Trilingual Northernlion be like Bonjour to the menchen, wir suchen dich in Paris

[@Eszik3]

"décrotté" is a word in French so I always thought decrotted was an actual word that only NL used for some reason

[@SeveralGhost]

Decroded being a French cognate would be a fun twist

[@hastyscorpion]

Decroded is was coined in Napoleon Dynamite

[@holyyoghurtman1952]

me when i forgot to caulk my deck: oh no my decrotted

[@kobold_sushi_executive_chef]

We're science guys, of course we smoke method with Bill Nye

[@mnbgt101]

5:22 When he said "this one's for you Zimbardo" and smashed the window of the car, that was actually a really smart reference to an experiment Zimbardo ran in 1969 called "The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos" which was similarly based on the human impulse upon seeing a decroted car. Famously this study was later used in the 1982 Wilson and Kelling article "Broken Windows Policing" which was the de facto framing for policing in the United States for quite some time coming out of the "professionalistic" policing era, and often still is. I had no idea NL was so educated in the history of US Policing Philosophy!

[@jhol2752]

"and i'm not trying to get into a broader philosophical discussion~" *gets into a broader philosophical discussion*

[@moresnqp]

DECRODED ISN'T REAL? i guess I've only heard NL say it but it feels like it's always been here

[@holyyoghurtman1952]

IT'S REAL TO ME

[@spenceratwood7899]

Napoleon dynamite says it

[@jamesf4423]

Never heard of it before today catching up on librarian videos after a few months. Sounds to me like just another NL-ism

[@jenm1]

we're putting empiricism on blast boys

[@ifwcorvids]

0:13 bladee reference

[@Hellcreature36]

Put a mask on my face now I look like an emoji

[@Delfofthebla]

The situation he is describing is also what made people think vaccines cause autism. Just a total bogus study that didn't get properly checked before it was broadcast.

[@chastermief839]

when he said "i found out when I was 35 that they just can make shit up" what he meant was "i finally got around to watching that hbomberguy video. no, not the plagarism one, the other one"

[@thedude-sp8po]

Yeah, nothing causes autism, especially not vaccines, not the things we eat, not polluted air, not fluoride. It just appears for no reason. Probably God's fault.

[@antoniopadilha2476]

The scientific method's been real quiet since this dropped

[@mattsun7403]

Look i know its a bit but the whole point is that existing things in literature continue to be challenged, im sure theres plenty of studies in sociology that challenge the Stanford prison experiment its that its not very interesting to report on that

[@Meowth666]

Sorry lil pup, it's 2024. Knowledge is cringe, gut feelings are based, get over it 💪

[@xaf15001]

The reality of it is it's simply not true. There's tons of reasons discouraging criticism, such as a) not wanting to paint a target on your back that would make your peers give you bad reviews b) to avoid dismantling interest on the field you're invested in, every academically or financially c) because you don't have the qualifications, reach, money, or lawyers to do so d) because your grant pushes you to focus on your own research The scientific method is a method that relies purely on trust. If the writer, reviewer, or even backer decides to not use the method, no one would know until it reached the public.

[@towaii]

4:57 caught slipping into korean, the claims to not know it are all a bit

[@oncedidmedea]

i feel so unemployed being this early

[@lazydictionary]

Bro it's a Saturday morning lol

[@sunchips18]

@@lazydictionaryThat’s how you know they’re unemployed. The days of the week don’t matter to them.

[@MindLikeFire]

@@sunchips18 Word

[@oncedidmedea]

at the time of writing it was saturday evening for me, got a shift on saturdays and sundays

[@Spood6]

This game provides the most beautiful depiction of Cincinnati, Ohio I've ever seen

[@zarabatanaproductions9240]

linguistic descriptivism > linguistic prescriptivism

[@Uhshawdude]

Dont let the French hear you saying shit like that

[@internettevarolanadam]

Imagine being a guiness records referee getting appointed to a scientific study and the study is "long term effects of excessive masturbation" You have to sit there for 20 years and make sure the study is publishable

[@axelle0144]

I can see why they call this the hypothesis

[@saz100]

As an econ grad I feel I have to justify my degree and say that a lot of economic research(including behavioral) also utilizes statistical modelling and study procedures based on isolating variables and investigating causality. Now, are the results less reliable than doing something like dropping a ball ten times and measuring the fall time so you can calculate it's speed? Sure, but it's all we've got.

[@HopUpOutDaBed]

as a stats major, I hate to tell you this, but we made all that shit up

[@saz100]

@@HopUpOutDaBed Shhhhh man youre gonna ruin it for us

[@mrdragonart2895]

Why not just dress up for a conference, pick up a mic and say "free market gud" and make a gazzillion dollars?

[@chucklesthelegend7305]

Statistical modeling is susceptible to bias too though. As a fellow econ grad...everyone is finding ways to get the dataset that proves their thesis, even if it takes a little finesse. There's a comfortable dalliance between scientific rigor and hand-picked cherries in most studies. Often subconscious

[@dtmessiah70]

I'm a STEM grad student and it happens here too. Sure, you measure the ball 10 times, but what if one time you dropped it a little awkwardly? Would it be more scientifically accurate to include or exclude that measurement? The heart of what NL lands on is correct, nobody is looking over your shoulder - it's the goodwill and trust of the scientific community that keeps the wheels turning. But there are checks and balances (i.e. statistics, reporting practices, ethics) in place to catch some of the strays.

[@davidlazerz8564]

I mean, putting it in the paper is precisely so other people can replicate it if they need to.

[@erfaniom9576]

his problem is that the people who run the paper don't verify if it's right or wrong BEFORE some third-party runs the test and potentially wastes their time and money on a fake paper

[@Tyc9909]

Another point is that why would anyone else replicate it, especially without the technology So 99.99% of people in the world would just have to trust it

[@Shellghost09]

I'm trying to buy a large hadron collider to replicate some findings but the results I'm getting on Amazon are concerning

[@Lily-Carruthers]

@@erfaniom9576 So he wants the journal to waste _their_ time and money instead? I fail to see how that solves anything.

[@erfaniom9576]

@@Lily-Carruthers it's either the journal wasting their time and money once, or scholars and students referencing stanford prison experiment countless time in their papers

[@williamarcher8780]

When I got a bit of government funding for grad school they had us do an online training thing that was essentially just "Don't make up fake data". They had a lot of funny skits too with in depth backstories about students getting pressured by assistant profs who were in turn under pressure from their tenure committee. Ultimately science is done by a scientific community, and just like any group of humans it's susceptible to our common foibles.

[@Winasaurus]

I'm sure everyone's seen the videos about the guy who nearly faked his way to a nobel prize by just going "ehh, I'm not getting useful results, but I know what it WOULD look like if I did" so he just drew the results charts himself first and then pretended he got that data and most people just kinda believed him because he said he did science and they were all hoping to get a footnote in the nobel prize speech.

[@zolopane117]

Merriam Endor Webster (1:56) when Ewok Tuah is the 2024 Word of the Year: 🧸🙄

[@chuck9185]

Yoo that pink moon cover

[@Lily-Carruthers]

Decroded is a perfectly cromulent word

[@Sputnik312]

the yellow moon song is so funny every time

[@Cmanorange]

yellow mooooon

[@spenceratwood7899]

Decroded is from Napoleon dynamite, a film that shaped much slang for Egg’s bracket

[@PiratesRock]

4:41 It’s worse when you consider that Psych teachers and Professors who should know better aren’t aware of these debunked studies. Like I’ve had teachers who aren’t aware that “lie detectors” aren’t accurate lie detectors

[@TrinityEcho]

This is how I found out I was gaslit into thinking decroded was a real word

[@AngelJimenez-cs4yq]

decroded when hawk tuah makes it into webster’s dictionary

[@PieBathBob]

NL getting mad at the stanford prison experiment is so real we're still learning about that shit in colleges even tho it's bunk

[@Drekromancer]

Local man discovers the scientific replication crisis

[@_fanter]

The unsung hero of NL's Silent Hill playthrough is when he swings his lead pipe at nothing, and the first 30 seconds have two bangers

[@Nightknight1992]

in my mind silent hill is a psychosis of the main character and in reality hes just slaughtering a small town down to his last resident.

[@arcmage7000]

Song at the end is about his wife... foreshadowing...

[@EDoyl]

Statistics are the thing you ask for when someone shows you an anecdote that contradicts something you don't want to change your mind about.

[@Winasaurus]

If you're changing your mind on something because you heard an anecdote with no backing, I think you may need to re-think your mental model on that

[@NoYoutubeHndlPlz]

Dwight Yoakam said to me that every hit song was new at some point.

[@talia_al_gabagool]

Whats crazy about bringing up the Stanford Prison Experiment is that the scientist died this week.

[@ambi8822]

That's why you check if papers are peer-reviewed if it's something that really matters to you.

[@notmyfullname598]

Pink moon :)

[@hydra5758]

He didn't make up the Standford Prison Experiment, they have footage and stuff

[@wmidler]

Room temperature superconductors anyone

[@okamisamakun]

Just searched decroded meaning and the second result is a link to the NL subreddit.

[@joesun662]

Librarian posting after I get home from the pride parade, the head is soaring!

[@Curiosity_R]

Me during the pride parade "the head is soaring!"

[@Wunder]

Get owned einstein

[@Meat_bicycle]

As an accounting grad Enron is my Stanford prison experiment lmao

[@quicksilver2923]

is it a bit when hes talking about zimbardo calling the stanford prison experiment fake days before death? I assumed he wasn't joking because he recently died. I can't find a source on it but I was convinced for a moment

[@csteve2342]

I’m too early to this. I need to get a job

[@lazydictionary]

It's a Saturday morning

[@trashman1605]

Putting the meth in method

[@Exilum]

I mean yeah of course it would be better for peer review to include doing the experiments as well, but this would make the cost of advancing science huge. We already rely on a lot of public-funded institutions with tight budgets, if every experiment had to be repeated, none of these institutions would be able to host much research anymore. On faking, most of the content in papers aren't the experiments themselves, but everything around it, from the setup beforehand to interpreting the data and drawing conclusions, so someone who wants to fake a paper with an experiment needs not just create fake data, but also make sure everything checks out, including the methology and setup of the experiment. You can't copy someone else's setup too because that would be a point of comparison for peer reviewers to use. With that level of effort you might as well just do it for real. When you hear of faked experiments, it's more often manipulated data from real experiments.

[@CascadePSA]

I genuinely didn’t realize that decroded wasn’t a word. I’m a monolingual English speaker and NL somehow tricked me into believing it was a part of my language.

[@ketexon]

Northernlion linguistics posting

[@Jet2094]

No mention of Daniel Kahneman...

[@nathantaylor4942]

Love the person in chat being like, "Yeah that's called malingering and means they'll throw out your results." So true, bestie.

[@DG360MaN]

Milgram might be chill

[@lucasasperti]

librarian, where is that pink moon bit from?

[@benmalatin5237]

I knew decroded was a word before I knew about NL. It’s definitely a real word regardless of if it’s in a dictionary.

[@DanielRisberg]

Milgram was not chill.

[@zsmith200]

I’m late to the librarian party but I review papers and it’s unpaid volunteer work by researchers in the field not employees of the journal. They absolutely should but more effort into this but the most volunteers can do is assess whether the experiment provides enough evidence to substantiate the claims/conclusions they made. The real validation happens when the community assesses and reproduces the paper themselves afterward

[@rainmaker5199]

7:40 - The real best field is Data Science, anybody who's tried to reproduce almost any of the papers published in that field knows its all jargon, the graphs are made up abstractions they never define, and their results are a slurry of innumerable runs squashed together.

[@yeahboi2851]

Gonna be honest I had no idea decroded wasn’t a real word

[@doctorpepper3519]

Joel

[@arkelon]

Science publication depends heavily on everyone acting in good faith

[@Appollochan]

Decrotted is defo a word now~

[@Jhonjackdiab]

I want to push back against the criticism of the scientific method and the state of academia by saying that the system works, but only overlong enough timescales. One thing that is often overlooked is that given enough time the system does converge towards the more true things. It just takes time, with time mistakes dissipate, successful methods are reinvented and experiments are eventually reproduced (usually when you want to make it newer and better). This doesn't take a few years though, this is a very slow multiple decades long process. Of course academia looks wrong and messy when looked at in the micro scale over a few years. Full of contradictions and different opinions. This is the way it's supposed to be and the way it has worked successfully to bring us so much. Now of course academia has its faults and is not a perfect system. I just don't want the media attention focusing on the state of academia to become how academia is wrong and science doesn't work anymore.

[@escriel]

Wait, decroded isn't a word?

[@TheLibraryofLetourneau]

no, its from napoleon dynamite

[@cornkopp2985]

these days they don't try to trick participants in scientific studies, at least in legit ones lol. I've just started participating in some NIH studies and they told me in great detail what the tests were trying to find, and what the tasks were, and how to do them. I was basically given the research paper outline before I ever started so I could consent to having all my data used in the study for that purpose. But I suppose that's only the norm because of those shitty older experiments lol

[@lupusjoe]

That's what they want you to think

[@mertaliyigit3288]

I was in a survey where they did that then at the end they were like "sike we tricked you we actually wanted to see your views on x not y, anyways sign this paper if you still want your data to be included"

[@kornelparoczai1763]

We finally got an explanation why he is so bad at shapes and memory games. He was in "game mode"

[@user-uq4gr5nl5o]

Where did he get that Stanford Prison Experiment dude admitted it was all made up? It would be ironically funny if NL just made that up

[@ruroruro]

"Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment" by Thibault Le Texier should be available on PubMed. I don't know how trustworthy that paper is, but if it's even 25% true then the Stanford Prison Experiment is total bunk.

[@LukeLockwood]

Skibidi Ryan. NL is using symbolic language. 1:46

[@LukeLockwood]

-2

[@Agreeable_Pickle]

Didnt someone fake research pertaining to alzheimers which resulted in very little progress in the treatment of the disease for like 3 decades?

[@1wayroad935]

I still think that James is going around attacking random homeless people

[@VERY_MAD_ALIEN]

Me handing the bank monopoly money saying how is this not real money we use it as money at the dinner table.

[@ruroruro]

We're linguistic deacriptivists. Of course, we hawk tuah on dat decroted thang.

[@jakehr3]

I mean he's legit bringing up the replication crisis which is an actual issue

[@virtualdotshelf]

17 seconds

[@iseriver3982]

Psychology has been found to be conning everyone for decades, and people still have respect for it

[@H3110ification]

What are you talking about

[@MalditoSeasEstadoDelsrael]

It's crazy to me how you can become a scientist of sorts on a first world country without learning about epistemology/philosophy of sciences. Sokal affair, and the different takes on the scientific method

[@trent2043]

NL really doesn’t understand how science works lol…

[@NoConsequenc3]

Yes he does, it's just that most laypeople dont. You all think there is some group out there testing all this shit before it's published and that's not true at all

[@trent2043]

@ “You all” LOL. I’m a physics PhD student at an Ivy League university. I am very much aware of how scientific publishing works. The group that is publishing peer reviewed research is most definitely “testing” their research before they publish. Another group may attempt to recreate the conclusion reached within a paper but it is only necessary for high-impact research.

[@Winasaurus]

@@trent2043 The group is 'testing' it among themselves with little outside oversight and little incentive for those with the knowledge and resources to replicate it. Which invites unscrupulous people to make whatever 'weak' studies they want saying anything that would be convenient for them, and people are likely to either not care to look into it, or blindly agree because they want to be in the footnote of a study for the sake of their career. There's a reason there's been a significant number of people outright faking 'science' almost to the point of getting nobel prizes before being caught.