... whether they are amateurs: they will often have 2 learn a little about statistics first, or collaborate with someone who can run some of the basic tests; but as I wrote in my thread, the standard way of using stats in medicine & psychology produces loads of type 1 errors ..
-
-
Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames
... as 4 Hypatia, however, I take it 1 of co-authors is professional philosopher, so that wouldn't be an amateur. For other journals, if they had novel quantitative methods you had to first learn (to the level of a typical NHST user), might've taken u a bit longer, but not much
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames
... anyway, I already said in my original tweet that there *may* be an asymmetry in terms of average epistemological rigor required to publish in a top journal in gender studies vs. medicine, but your hoax doesn't show that. Just for a few examples, here is a paper in a ...
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames
... and here is a paper of mine critiquing a study published by pretty smart researchers in the Journal of Urology - a top journal - for making truly astonishing errors in statistical interpretation and reasoning https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tre.531 …
3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames
... I could copy in dozens of more examples, but I referred to the 'replication crisis' generally because it is, well, a general problem. So I see your hoax as caught on the horns of a dilemma: if your point was that a person can, in bad faith, trick a small number of ...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp
You could reply with dozens of examples. I could send you thousands of grievance studies papers. Most of the canon, in fact. As you said, one really only needs to read the papers that are there to see the problem exists.
2 replies 3 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @ConceptualJames @briandavidearp
Just remember: Every time you launch this defense, you're putting rigorous journals in fields with functioning epistemologies on par with whatever is happening in feminist geography that honored us for insisting that dog-humping tells us about rape culture and how to fix it.
2 replies 5 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @ConceptualJames
No, I'm not, because I am not making generalizable claims based on anecdotal hoax data. In psychology & medicine there is a lot of epistemological rot, it is very deep, & it is often harder to see because it's dressed up in mindless statistical rituals so it looks more sciency
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames
... even how we use scales in, well, most of psychology that uses scales, is frequently no better than "quantitative alchemy" as these authors argue:https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01973533.2016.1256288?journalCode=hbas20 …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm not sure I follow what you mean by this. Is this an implied of argument of some kind? It's been really difficult for me to track the thread of what you are saying in some of these exchanges or what kind of response you are looking for, other than perhaps to be provocative
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.