Why I use the term “forking paths”

Harvey Motulsky writes:

You applied the term “forking paths” to refer to a form of researcher degrees of freedom.

It seems to me [Motulsky] that the name “forking paths” has not really taken off, partly because the publication has a very broad title, and partly because “garden of forking paths” is only memorable to someone who has read Borges.

But it occurred to me that a better term might be “multiple outs.” That is a term used by magicians to describe a trick where what the audience sees would be an incredible coincidence (without magic) had the trick ended as planned. But in fact the magician chose among multiple endings based on what happened along the way.

Here is one example (well the first part; it ends much more cleverly; skip the first minute).

I see what he’s getting at but I don’t like “multiple outs,” as to me it implies intentionality and misdirection (given the association with magicians). My point with forking paths is that it doesn’t have to happen on purpose!

Also I recommend this recent article, Forking paths and workflow in statistical practice and communication.