Instead of trying to be really certain that a surprising effect is true, I like the goal of trying to explain things that we already find interesting (how people learn language, or how people have social interactions). "How does it work?" is often the most interesting question
-
-
Replying to @Alex_Danvers @IrisVanRooij and
I think
@EJWagenmakers point that you need to test models that are developed through exploration on new data is a fair one, and it represents a particular stage of developing a scientific explanation. But I also feel that psychology needs explanations more than effects right now1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @Alex_Danvers @IrisVanRooij and
I have always harbored the hope that finding robust effects could lead us to ultimately develop theory by laying out what a good theory needs to account for. I still think that's true, and it does sometimes seem like an incisive experiment can help determine which theory is right
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Alex_Danvers @IrisVanRooij and
My secret concern in all this is that I don't quite have the math chops to contribute to psychology in the way that I want. I've got much more training in designing and running simple factorial experiments to establish effects than I do in formal modeling.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @Alex_Danvers @IrisVanRooij and
I think I would probably benefit more from further work understanding formal theory than establishing a lot of new effects, and I think that's generally true in psych. I hope it becomes a more mainstream part of the field (and more accessible for grad students to pick up).
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
-
Replying to @bradpwyble @Alex_Danvers and
It would help if undergrads were taught to code and even model. Just like they are taught the very basics of other parts of psychology. More on my thoughts, of course, on my blog.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
I think we all shy away too much from teaching them skills. Both my most recent post http://neuroplausible.com/programming and my other post on Matlab http://neuroplausible.com/matlab basically touch on this.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @bradpwyble and
The reasons are complex and don't just boil down to "modellers don't do good enough work" here IMHO.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @Alex_Danvers and
Yes there are a lot of reasons. I do think some modellers have embraced the mystique of the profession at everyone's expense but also the field has avoided trying to fix the problem at the curriculum level.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Some have. Usefully for them they, the worst cases, aren't on Twitter AFAIK.
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @Alex_Danvers and
Let's talk about the better ones then. I really liked Mike Mozer's work on attention. He did a great job of breaking down complex topics and was a great role model for me.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.