Alexandra Guth

Professor Billie Dziech

Intermediate Composition 2089

5 September 2017

Response 4

In his article, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” John P. A. Ioannidis

argues that the majority of published research claims represent false findings, and there are

several factors that influence this falsification. In many cases, conclusions are drawn after a

single study has been conducted, and this lack of confirmation makes it difficult to justify the

data from the study to be a fact. According to Ioannidis, “the probability that a research finding

is indeed true depends on the prior probability of it being true (before doing the study), the

statistical power of the study, and the level of statistical significance” (Ioannidis 2005). Ioannidis

also defines “bias” and explains its role in research. Often times, bias results in manipulation of

certain factors and can lead to distortion within the analysis and reporting of the findings.

Ioannidis clearly differentiates between “bias” and “chance variability,” however, which relates

back to the notion that it is important to replicate experiments. Similarly, the author emphasizes

the danger of having small sample and effect sizes, flexibility, financial interests, and a scientific

field with many teams involved. To improve the current situation, Ioannidis suggests the need to

focus on large-scale studies that test key concepts with minimal bias and to consider the

possibility of the relationship prior to the actual test.

Though the ideas presented in the article are valid, it is interesting that Ioannidis would

generalize so much as to claim in his title that the majority of published research findings are

false. Based on his actual arguments within the article, it seems as though Ioannidis is not
necessarily disputing the accuracy of scientific research, but rather the way in which it is

presented.

One of the issues that Ioannidis discusses is the idea of bias. As we have previously

discussed in class, it is almost impossible to conduct research without some form of bias, as even

studying the subject in the first place is drawn from some internal motivation. While this bias

may be used to skew the results of a test or intentionally hide opposing results, Ioannidis states

that “measurement errors and inefficient use of data are probably becoming less frequent

problems” (Ioannidis 2005). It can be interpreted that though the claims that scientists make may

be inaccurate, the data itself is becoming more and more accurate with technology.

Likewise, much of Ioannidis’ argument is that with the amount of data that is being

collected, it is necessary to refrain from publishing conclusions so early on in the research

process. One test may provide extremely accurate and relevant data, but if that test is not

replicated numerous times then that data should not be considered a scientific fact. There are

more false claims than one would suspect, but the data itself isn’t necessarily false.

Ultimately, science is ever-evolving, and it can be difficult to make definitive conclusions

based on research because another study may disprove the original idea or maybe even build

upon it. In my opinion, I do not believe that Ioannidis’s article is disputing the accuracy of

scientific research, but warning about the overwhelming bias within the field and the dangers of

drawing conclusions without fully understanding the scope of the subject.

 Works Cited

Ioannidis, John P. A. “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.” PLOS Medicine,

Public Library of Science, 30 Aug. 2005,

journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020124.