Do you mean that you want to preregister the modeling constraints you impose on yourself, prior to data fitting? Like pre-setting parameters?
-
-
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @bradpwyble and
Yes. Not necessarily parameters but mostly proposed mechanisms.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GunnarBlohm @IrisVanRooij and
But publishing is essentially a form of pre-registration. Once published, it's a permanent record of the model's particular instantiation. No HARKing possible.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @IrisVanRooij and
HARking occurs during model building. E.g. people change their hypotheses about model mechanisms and do incremental adjustments until they're happy with the model fit to the data.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GunnarBlohm @IrisVanRooij and
That's just model building. All models are built based on data. How else would you do it?
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @bradpwyble @GunnarBlohm and
I think this is any interesting question. I agree iterating on models is part of the process, but valuable info is lost if those iterations aren't reported in the paper and only the final product is
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @neurograce @bradpwyble and
Yes - so a final report that includes information about failed iterations would achieve the same purpose as a pre-reg in this case, if @GunnaerBlohm's goal is to prevent HARking?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @venpopov @neurograce and
I seldom see publications of modeling with failed iterations. I think it would be good if we indeed publish them more.
1 reply 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @venpopov and
For instance, when I build on someone else's modeling or theoretical efforts I often discover parts of theory that haven't been specified, even if there are simulations. If one carefully looks at the simulations, then turns out that parts were "hacked" to make the simulation >>
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @venpopov and
>>work, but seldom it's specified what this means in terms of theoretical commitments & consequences. I understand a bit that this is done because reviewers like "clean stories", but I think it is a real pity and something we can improve upon as as computational modelers.
1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes
Yes! Happened to me quite a few times. I even wrote it up. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.05.001 …
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.