Author: Bob C-J
I'm a teacher, researcher, and gadfly of neuroscience. My research interests are in the neural basis of learning and memory, the history of neuroscience, computational neuroscience, bibliometrics, and the philosophy of science. I teach courses in neuroscience, statistics, research methods, learning and memory, and happiness. In my spare time I'm usually tinkering with computers, writing programs, or playing ice hockey.

Gaining expertise doesn’t have to close your mind–another adventure in replication

You may have seen it on the news: being an expert makes you close-minded.  This was circa 2015, and the news reports were about this paper (Ottati, Price, Wilson, & Sumaktoyo, 2015) by Victor Ottati’s group, published in JESP.  The paper

Memories fade..but something remains

This isn’t a statistics post–it’s about Bob’s neuroscience research.  Most long-term memories are ‘forgotten’–meaning that recall becomes less and less likely.  Psychologists have long known, though, that forgetting is complex, and that fragments of a memory can remain.  For example,

You’ve got to build your love on a solid foundation– p < .05 does not mean you have enough data to have done good science

Joe Tex sang it well: You’ve got to build your love on a solid foundation. Applied to science: you should build a research program that is robust, generative, and fruitful.. a solid foundation for exploring the hidden mechanisms at work

Video – Getting started with the New Statistics and Open Science

This fall I (Bob) was invited to give a talk at Indiana University as part of a series on good science and statistical practice organized by the university’s Social Science Research Commons (SSRC).  The SSRC is like a core facility

The New Statistics for Neuroscientists

This summer I (Bob) was asked to write a series of perspective pieces on statistical issues for the Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience. My first effort has just been published (Calin-Jageman, 2017)–it is a call for neuroscience education to shift away

Adventures in Replication – Reviewers don’t want to believe disappointing replication results

Trying to publish replication results is difficult.  Even when the original evidence is very weak or uncertain, reviewers tend to look for reasons to explain away a smaller effect in the replication.  If nothing comes to mind, reviewers may even

Beyond p values – Dispatches from the ASA symposium on statistical inference

The next couple of posts will be about my experience at the ASA conference on statistical inference: A World Beyond p < .05. The first session featured Steve Goodman and John Ioannidis (who Skyped in from Australia).  One highlight was

Brain Stimulation – Can we trust the empirical record?

Brain stimulation research has been exploding in neuroscience.  First came the rapid adoption of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), a technique in which powerful magnetic fields are used to create inductive currents within the skull.  More recently, Direct Current Stimulation (DCS)

Adventures in Replication: p values and Illusions of Incompatibility

Here’s an idea I run into a lot in peer reviews of replication studies: If the original study found p < .05 but the replication found p > .05, then the results are incompatible and additional research is needed to

Something a bit different: maintaining memories

I’m wondering off the topic of the New Statistics today just to mention that my lab has published a new paper that characterizes the the changes in gene expression that accompany storing and maintaining a new long-term memory  (Conte et