Contributed by Rose Maier and John Flournoy. There are stats and research methods classes offered by several departments around campus, but it can be hard to know which classes to take, or who to ask for advice. This is a venue for us to pool our knowledge about stats and methods courses offered around campus. After the jump, you’ll find an extensive, but likely incomplete, list of statistics and methods courses at UO. If you’re aware of any that are missing, especially 607 or 610 listed courses, please speak up in the comments or email us. If you have taken any … Continue reading Statistics and methods classes at UO

This Thursday, Sept 13, Ted Bell and Mandy Hampton Wray will be presenting a data analysis problem involving a longitudinal intervention study. Ted wrote out some notes summarizing the problem — this should give you a gist of what they’re looking for. See you all Thursday! ***** Longitudinal data sets from an intervention. Time series: Pre-test Post-Test Longit 1 Longit 2 Longit3 Between subject controlled factors: intervention vs. control groups Considerations: Testing dates are not on fixed schedule, but show considerable variability between Post-test, L1, and other dates Some data points are missing. Many potential dependent variables. Many potential predictors … Continue reading This Thursday – analyzing a longitudinal intervention study

Here are a few links following up on things that came up in our discussion today. 1. For those of you who are interested in learning more about the Diederik Stapel fraud case, a collection of links to commentaries about it. 2. Regarding Dirk Smeesters, I mentioned that one of his collaborators posted a lengthy comment about the case, including his involvement and some pretty raw emotions, when it was first revealed at Retraction Watch. (See also here at Wired.) 4. Some interesting parallels between Simonsohn’s work and that of an earlier fraud detective, NIH biologist Walter Stewart. ***** The … Continue reading Followup to our discussion of Simonsohn’s fraud paper

For our next Meth Lab meeting, this Thursday at noon, we are going to talk about scientific fraud. As many of you probably know, this summer there were some revelations of high-profile fraud cases in psychology, both of which resulted in the resignation of the accused researchers (Dirk Smeesters of Erasmus University, and Lawrence Sanna at the University of Michigan). Both were caught when Uri Simonsohn, a psychologist at Wharton, investigated statistical anomalies in their published studies. Here is a link to a working paper by Simonsohn (under review at Psych Science) that details his method for detecting improbable results. … Continue reading Scientific fraud

Our first meeting will be Thursday, July 19, from 12-1 in 143 Straub. Here’s the agenda: 1. Introductory and organizational stuff. We’ll talk about why we’re all here and what we are hoping to accomplish. We will also talk about possible topics for future meetings. 2. For our first topic, we thought it would be fun to read and discuss a recent article on analyzing stimulus effects in experiments. Say you’re running an experiment that has multiple trials within each of 2 or more conditions, and each trial presents a stimulus drawn from a larger possible set. If that sounds … Continue reading First meeting – stimulus effects article and discussion

Do you have a design, measurement, or analysis problem that you’d like some feedback on? Or is your summer feeling empty without a little statistics to keep it going? Three of us from the Department of Psychology (Elliot Berkman, Karyn Lewis and Sanjay Srivastava) are starting up a brownbag for consulting and discussion of statistics and methods. We’re calling it the Quantitative Methods Laboratory, which is a mouthful but conveniently abbreviates to “Meth Lab.” Meetings will serve 2 purposes: People can present on problems in design or analysis from their own research and get consultation and feedback from the group. … Continue reading Welcome to Meth Lab