[Link] Ideas on how to improve scientific research

post by arikr · 2019-06-20T23:14:58.442Z · score: 14 (6 votes) · EA · GW · 5 comments


Why this is a worthwhile read for people interested in EA:

I haven't dug deep into this topic, but I suspect that this post will be of interest to anyone who is interested in "improving scientific research" and I believe that many EAs fall into that group.


Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by HaukeHillebrandt · 2019-06-21T21:44:39.582Z · score: 10 (4 votes) · EA(p) · GW(p)

Thanks very interesting!

I have a long report on meta-research and funding opportunity here:


comment by gavintaylor · 2019-07-06T15:49:27.960Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · EA(p) · GW(p)

Brian presents a lot of nice ideas in that article. Besides methods of improving academic publication and knowledge transfer, it sounds like a skill shortage exists:

People who understand both technology and business are rare. They are the intersection of two already rare groups. Many scientists have an allergic reaction to business, and many business people are unable to distinguish real science from pseudoscience. Perhaps, if we didn’t have to rely on these rare bilingual people, we’d see more innovative products in the world.

EA has a lot of experience identifying talent to fill gaps, maybe working out ways to find people with an aptitude for science and business could be a high value project.

comment by gavintaylor · 2019-06-21T19:43:26.919Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · EA(p) · GW(p)

I'd really like to read this article, but I've reached my limit of free monthly reads on Medium. So it is somewhat ironic that Brian's last point is about the cost of academic journals.

comment by Risto_Uuk · 2019-06-21T08:09:44.642Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · EA(p) · GW(p)

Open Philanthropy Project's link doesn't work.

comment by arikr · 2019-06-21T19:28:26.109Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · EA(p) · GW(p)

Thanks, fixed.

@AaronGertler it seems there's a bug when pasting a link in between braces ().