Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Tal Yarkoni
I wrote this paper arguing that the inferential statistics we report in psychology papers are so disconnected from the hypotheses they're meant to test that they may as well be made up. feedback is appreciated.
Most theories and hypotheses in psychology are verbal in nature, yet their evaluation overwhelmingly relies on inferential statistical procedures. The validity of the move from qualitative to...
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More
Michael Breakspear 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @talyarkoni
Interesting and thought provoking paper! But, ironically, shouldn't it be called something like, "Under-estimation of posterior error through use of unrealistically restrictive statistical models in some psychology papers."
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Tal Yarkoni 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @DrBreaky
no. :)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Alex Shackman 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @talyarkoni
It's quite good. You're getting crankier, more Meehlish tho ;)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Tal Yarkoni 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @ajshackman
the Meehlian Catch-22 I've discovered is that if you say things with a smile, people think the problem must not be very serious, and if you say it while yelling, people dismiss you for being too angry
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Pierre Bellec 1. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @talyarkoni
Quick thought. I feel you are taking stats too seriously. Fixed effect models are honest, at the end of the day you know only as much as your sample. Practical approaches to test model generalization (eg ) seem more useful to me than mixed effect models.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Tal Yarkoni 1. pro
Odgovor korisniku/ci @pierre_bellec
oh, sure. but I'm not arguing for any particular kind of model. I'm saying that researchers need to be clear and honest about the relationship between their models and their verbal claims. that's all.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Science in Crisis 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @talyarkoni
Congrats on your paper! I was wondering what your views are on generalization outside psychology. Is it a general problem or not (pun intended)?
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Tal Yarkoni 22. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @sciencecrisis
based on my careful examination of psychology, I'm extremely confident that the problems I discuss generalize to at least the same degree to all other sciences
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
nick michalak 23. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @talyarkoni
On p. 11, you talk about setting priors without terms in the model. How did you do that technically? (R's brms won't let me set priors that aren't in the model specification/data)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Tal Yarkoni 23. stu
Odgovor korisniku/ci @nmmichalak
probably can't do it in brms, not sure. u could do it directly in Stan or some other probabilistic programming framework. my Python/PyMC3 code for those analyses is here:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"