The great guys over at 80,000 Hours made a quiz for that recent replication study (previously discussed on LW), where you can find out if you can predict as well as the scientists or the prediction market. Description:
Can you guess which psychology experiments had correct findings and which were bogus, just from reading a brief description of their results?
Depending on how long you want to play, we'll describe 10, 15 or 21 psychology findings published in Nature and Science, and you'll have to guess whether a replication, with a much larger sample size, got the same result.
Before starting, the people who organised these 21 replications asked expert psychologists to predict which results would hold up. We'll show you how you compare to their performance at the end! (And give you links to all the papers.)
Interesting. I was surprised at how predictable the studies were. It felt like results that aligned with my intuition were likely to be replicated, and results that didn't (e.g., priming affecting a pretty unrelated task) were unlikely to be replicated. Makes me wonder - what's the value of this science if a layperson like me can score 18/18 (with 3 I don't knows) by gut feel after reading only a paragraph or two? Hmm.
(Then again, I guess my attitude of finding predictable results low-value is what has incentivized so much bad science in the hunt for counterintuitive results with their higher rewards.)
The great guys over at 80,000 Hours made a quiz for that recent replication study (previously discussed on LW), where you can find out if you can predict as well as the scientists or the prediction market. Description: