Yes. Also: if effect sizes don’t mean anything, then p-levels don’t mean anything either (since e.s. is a function of p and N). Which, who knows, maybe is true but let’s not go there today.
-
-
-
Yup. We should take lab effect sizes as seriously as we take them and be consistent. Can’t turn it on and off by transforming it.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
And just to be clear, I do think that psychology lab studies are studying real things (most of the time) but effect sizes also mean something *in reality*
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
I uploaded my review of the article: https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2020/02/review-of-do-effect-sizes-in-psychology.html …
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I had a heated discussion in a methods class in grad school in which I argued that ecological and external validity was as important as internal validity. People were not pleased when I said their 2x2 designs with intro psych students were of limited relevance. Was I wrong?
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
not only are they super expensive, they just dont work. my last lab study I ran was during my bachelor, because exactly this. ridiculiously expensive and definitively not worth it
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
What I really dislike is the fact that psychologists talk about these issues and other don‘t do it. Other disciplines also run experiments and have no clue about method or forms of validity. They feel no pain with their results except psychologists.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.