Complete Captcha
Loading..
Economist 74d3
Kung老师显然日了你妈，不然怎么会有你这种为造假洗地的孝子贤孙？
Kung老师日 你妈了吗？天天黑他！再黑我们全师门上阵一起去日 你家！
Economist 1dab
bump
Economist 4b1b
吵什么呢？人家成功了抓到老鼠了，你们不去学习经验，在这里嫉妒泼脏水，有什么意思？
Economist e1ef
Xiumin Martin才是yin贱，舔白吊给白吊日比，背信弃义数典忘祖改姓，抄袭中文论文学术不端
Economist cf48
Wow
Economist d468
Very well said! -Shuo
Post <blockquote>lmao kung is just an incredibly unlucky guy who keeps running into RAs that would falsify his data to create perfect results without his knowledge <blockquote>On the Chen and Kung 2019 QJE paper: "This is extremely suspicious. Speculating, it looks like the authors had a nice paper using provincial data, but a referee asked them to extend it to prefecture leaders. To fit their story, they needed to find an effect of land sales for secretaries (but not mayors), and an effect of GDP growth for mayors (but not secretaries). But maybe the data didn’t agree, and their RA had to falsify the mayor promotion data to get the ‘correct’ result. This wouldn’t be easy for referees to spot, since the replication files didn’t include spell-level data. But how else did they collect such error-ridden data that also just happened to produce results consistent with their story?" Source: https://michaelwiebe.com/blog/2021/02/replications</blockquote></blockquote>
Send Post »
Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.
a blockquote code em strong ul ol li