The median researcher hypothesis seems false. Something like an 80⁄20 distribution seems much more plausible, and is presumably more like what you’d find for measurable proxies of ‘influence on a field’ like number of publications in “top tier” journals, or number of researchers in the field who were your grad student. Voting “no”.
Dude, the first sentence of the post says “roughly median researchers”; note the “roughly”. Researchers at the upper 20th percentile in a field are roughly median researchers; in a field where e.g. the median researcher doesn’t get stats 101, the 20th percentile researcher also probably does not understand stats 101.
The median researcher hypothesis seems false. Something like an 80⁄20 distribution seems much more plausible, and is presumably more like what you’d find for measurable proxies of ‘influence on a field’ like number of publications in “top tier” journals, or number of researchers in the field who were your grad student. Voting “no”.
Dude, the first sentence of the post says “roughly median researchers”; note the “roughly”. Researchers at the upper 20th percentile in a field are roughly median researchers; in a field where e.g. the median researcher doesn’t get stats 101, the 20th percentile researcher also probably does not understand stats 101.