3 Comments

I think this statement, "Pre-registered hypotheses should be a requirement for just about every experiment", seems incorrect because it implies that all experiments are hypothesis driven. While that may be the case in some fields, how can that be the case for something like an experiment which characterizes the binding curve of a protein.

Expand full comment

Yes, you're right. I was thinking about clinical studies, mainly, in this essay. Much of engineering is not necessarily hypothesis-driven, including synthetic biology / genetic circuit characterization.

Expand full comment

It is also true that many basic science fields e.g. organic chemistry are hypothesis driven but don't particularly lend themselves to pre-registration in many cases. For work that simply stands as it is, i.e. one can show whether or not it works by simply replicating it (e.g. a reaction), it seems unneeded (not that organic chemistry doesn't have its own issues) [I believe Derek Lowe wrote on a similar point here: https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/lets-see-that-again/1010192.article].

Though I agree that people who use p-values should in general pre-register.

Expand full comment