APS just wrapped up. Geoff and I were privileges to help host a symposium on making progress moving the field away from p values towards the New Statistics. Our co-conspirators were fellow text-book author Susan Nolan, Psychological Science editor Stephen…
Introduction to the New Statistics
The online community and blog for ITNS
Month: May 2017
Getting the whole story: journals could be more encouraging
Even though replication is a cornerstone of the scientific method, psychology journals rarely publish direct replications (though that situation may be changing). Why not? Is it self-censorship, with authors not bothering to conduct or submit such studies? Or is it…
from the APS Convention in Boston
Bob and I are in Boston this weekend for the annual APS Convention. It’s great to catch up, and discuss a million things about ITNS and this blog, and our future plans. Our publisher told us yesterday that early signs…
Confirmatory Research – A special issue of JESP
Catching up a bit, but in November of 2016 the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology published a special issue dedicated just to confirmatory research. http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy.cc.uic.edu/science/journal/00221031/67/supp/C The whole issue is well-worth reading: There is an excellent guide to pre-registration (ostensibly for…
A cool new journal is Open
APS (The Association for Psychological Science) recently launched its sixth journal: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. A dreadful mouthful of a title–why not drop ‘Advances in’ for a start–but it looks highly promising. Maybe it will become…
Publishing unexpected results as a moral obligation for scientists
Amen! A revised European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity now specifically calls on researchers and publishers to not bury negative results. Specifically, the guidelines formulate this principle for publication and dissemination: Authors and publishers consider negative results to be…
What the datasaurus tells us: Data pictures are cool
In various places in ITNS, especially Chapter 11 (Correlation) we discuss how important it is to make good pictures of data, to reveal what’s really going on. Calculating a few summary statistics–or even CIs–often just doesn’t do the job. Many…
Now for some good news: SIPS
The Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) held its first meeting last year, with around 100 good folks attending. Working groups have been–would you believe–working hard since then. The second meeting is 30 July to 1 August, in…
Methodological awakening: backlash against the backlash
Science has had some rough times lately, no doubt. No need to rehearse the many findings indicating that we have some problems that need a fixing. As Will Gervais put it, we’re in the midst of a “methodological awakening”. The…
Replication problems are not competence problems
Why do some replication studies fail to produce the expected results? There are lots of possible reasons: the expectation might have been poorly founded, the replication study could have been under-powered, there could be some unknown moderator, etc. Sure, but…
New paper from Ioannidis suggests fMRI studies of sex differences suffer from publication bias (https://t.co/944KKGSpWG). This is a big issue, leading to inaccurate conceptions and poor policy. Also, this is not an isolated finding...
This thread by @danengber gives a thoughtful overview of the much-hyped report on reproducibility by the National Association of Scholars, a conservative group. It shows the report has much sense to it, some non-sense, and some invidious use of rigor issues to de-regulate
I'll be curious to see reactions to this report on "The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science." Most of it (~80%) is entirely in line with honest efforts to promote open, reproducible research. Highlights in this thread: https://t.co/bDrT34M81N
New Stats blog: Badges, Badges, Badges: Open Science on the March https://t.co/LNy1tFrOL7
New Stats blog: ITNS–A New Review on Amazon https://t.co/izCG6d9C9p
Top
Recent Comments