I disagree about how real interactions are. They exist, but they are based on major differences (e.g., sex differences, large IQ diffs) in one of the independent variables. Most are very small though, and I don't trust them without replication.
When you just can't admit failure and let your dumb interaction claim die. Interactions are mostly not real people. And when real, they are usually tiny. And when not, they aren't prevalent. Reality = 95% main effects. https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyy273/5238857 …pic.twitter.com/W1Bl1qOVHp
-
-
-
Almost no interactions are real and won't replicate, see http://rpubs.com/Jonatan/interactions … by
@jonatanpallesen -
Most run-of-the-mill interactions are fake. I agree. But some would be real. For example, I would believe a (replicated) interaction between IQ and an abstract, principle-based science teaching style.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.