36: Statistical inconsistencies in published research by Everything Hertz Podcast published on 2017-01-27T18:11:07Z In episode 34 we covered a blog post that highlighted questionable analytical approaches in psychology. That post mentioned four studies that resulted from this approach, which a team of researchers took a closer look into. Dan and James discuss the statistical inconsistencies that the authors reported in a recent preprint. Some of the topics covered: - Trump (of course) - A summary of the preprint - The GRIM test to detect inconsistencies - The researchers that accidently administered the equivalent of 300 cups of coffee to study participants - How do we prevent inconsistent reporting? - 21 word solution for research transparency - Journals mandating statistical inconsistency checks, such as 'statcheck' Links The pre-print https://peerj.com/preprints/2748/ 'The grad student that didn't say no' blog post http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no The caffeine study http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-38744307 Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group lab handbook (see page 6 for open science practices) http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/expsych/documents/targ/TARG%20Handbook%20161128.pdf 21 word solution http://spsp.org/sites/default/files/dialogue_26(2).pdf Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Genre Science
