5:55 AM
Then the person should, as I have done in the past, state up front that it is anecdotal. By the way, your definition says " is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them."
"
it says all data and methodology
You know how much I love to cite things, during the time I was active, I think I cited more research and even went through and described it more than anyone on the site by several folds. Your definition does not explain much. By the way if it were a researcher or academic they are not likely to be looking through stackexchange for studies....they'd just look through a database like pubmed or the various journals.
The anecdotal evidence, if it was obviously said it was such (as I always do anyway) and it was actually a detailed account can help someone expand their research onto more topics in the area that they did not realize may be there. It helps the researcher get that depth so they actually realize there "there may be stuff worth checking out in regards to this person's experience" (a bigger picture) and not just the small piece of it a citation specifically proved.
Like I've read studies then had the exact opposite experience to what they claimed was true. There was a reason for that and even the fact that there could be a reason would of never been known had I not known, well, my own anecdote and experience with it.
@StevenJeuris Here is all I'm saying. You all should allow and even encourage detailed anecdotes that could be said to answer a question. They can even state it up front - but it's pretty obvious they're citing their own experience without them having to say it. If they can also cite studies around the answer you seek and in light of their experience - that's the home run.
The anecdotal evidence is obviously not proven, but it helps the question seeker get to the REAL answer - as hopefully someone else could use it to provide another answer with research to come up with the ultimate kung-fu pow answer of answers that is the closest to reality as possible as it would be, in essence, more 3 dimensional (due to analyzing whatever depth the anecdote provided) and thus real world tested, even if the n=1 on the anecdote.
Also, it may spur others to provide answers on those questions...give them life. Instead, you all seem to prefer to have the questions fall to the bottom of the stack and thus get an answer rate lower than anyone else - whereas in contrast anecdotes (although just one anecdote to answer a question is not very ideal agreeably) may bring the question back to life and encourage others to do try put more effort into it + it provides content in some form or fashion rather than none.
You just have to moderate those anecdotes, and to be honest the site will do that itself with its voting system.
It seems you did not read any of my citations - lol empirical research is so useful when people don't even want to read it, isn't it? If you didn't read any of it and are trying to respond, that's a HUGE blindspot, especially if all you do is qualitative research.
In nearly any way/shape/or form you put the topic of "anecdotal evidence," if you consider and actually read or even just skim my citations (which cover almost all aspects of the topic) as well as suggestions as to how or why to incorporate it into the website, it's blantly obvious it's something you all need to consider much more seriously.
It doesn't matter which, if any, "strawmen," you speak of you think I may be discussing here - as my research citations and/or I have done a 360 and knocked over all of them including whichever one or ones you consider to be the real discussion which seems to keep changing as in when I answer your question(s) or change of topic you don't seem to accept, disagree, or directly rebuttle against it..you just "teleport" around at will.
Also, I can't post on meta so if anyone else cares about this, post it for me.
@StevenJeuris "this is a site for 'researchers, academics, students, and anyone else needing expert answers'." The only people who are experts here, in this field, are the ones who realize the limited extent of human knowledge in comparison to reality we have in published studies and theories as almost every study ever done has a flaw that can be refuted against.
And those people who are experts know they can never answer any question in its entirety but only attempt to approach it. Stackexchange is the most useful when multiple people answer a question from different viewpoints and in different ways, not when everyone has to answer it in the same way. True Q&A is a lie as it assumes there is one ultimate answer to every question. it's a limit (as in the definition from calculus) one attempts to reach but never does - although the more data....
...available the closer the true answer comes to being revealed. Otherwise, limiting the spread of knowledge (no matter its form) would cause this to be a Question & NotVeryCloseToReality Answer side of the site - and that's a "bad user experience" to quote that super moderator. It also encourages and scares away anyone from attempting to answer the question - which is really just a contribution towards getting it.
"It" being the real answer: the truth.
I was inspired by this question on SE Gardening Meta:
How can we get more experts answering questions?, by John Ericson.
I have searched our Meta site and thought this might be worthy as a new question.
What can we do to improve and maintain the quality of answers on the
site?
How can we enco...
I used to date someone that had BPD, and I had it in my head that if I could help her be more positive, then it would somehow be illeviated. After over a year of doing my best I finally understood that I am not the person to try and help her. I am a psychology enthusiast, but I learned that to ...
A friend of mine told me that her daughter was in an accident prior to the age of 12 which resulted in head trauma and brain damage. The child went through an extensive recovery process (relearning how to walk, speak, etc) and made a nearly full recovery, the only symptoms which remained were fre...
The question might seem weird. Does sympathetic nervous system acts 'bilaterally' meaning if you shout to a person's left ear a loud noise (e.g. by headphones), will it activate sympathetic system just on the left or on the both sides. For example it will only dilate left pupil or dilate both ?
