5 ms·
Effect sizes and power in cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature
- triplesec 10y agoFull title "Empirical assessment of published effect sizes and power in the recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature" was too long. Authors: Denes Szucs and John Ioannidis
- brudgers 10y agoDirect link to paper: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/08/25/071530.full.pdf http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/08/25/071530.f...
- nonbel 10y agoWhat is with those awful blurry figures?
- mattkrause 10y agoCould the title be tweaked to include "effect sizes and power" somehow? Those are the most important parts of the title, yet are missing completely from the short version.
- triplesec 10y agoSuggestions welcome and I'll alter. Edit, oh I can't, have to let admins do so if they think it best. IT was a hard edit to do.
- mattkrause 10y agoPower and Effect Sizes in Recent Psychology & Neuro Papers, perhaps?
- sctb 10y agoOK, we updated the title from “Empirical assessment of recent cognitive neuroscience and psychology literature” which was a good edit to begin with!
- maroonblazer 10y agoI'd love someone more adept at the statistics than me to shed some light on the veracity and implications of this study. Based on the abstract it seems pretty damning for cognitive science research conducted over the last 5 years (the period covered in the study). Perhaps it extends even farther back if most of those studies were built on previous research.
- bbctol 10y agoFor those not in the know, John Ioannidis is responsible for much of the current focus on reproducibility in science, following his seminal 2005 paper "Why Most Published Research Findings are False." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/)
- triplesec 10y agoHere's an Atlantic profile on his work, from 2010 http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science/308269/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-dam...
- SubiculumCode 10y agoPost-hoc power assessments? c'mon e.g. Hoenig & Heisey (2001) provide evidence that several different approaches for calculating post-hoc power are flawed and can produce misleading conclusions. Once a confidence interval has been computed, there is no additional information that a post hoc power calculation can provide. Nevertheless cog neuroscience has had a bad habit of using small samples, sample sizes that developmental cognitive neuroscientists have criticized.
- mattkrause 10y agoHoenig & Heisey (2001) discuss computing power after finding non-significant results. This is a bit different from the current paper, which also looks at the power for significant findings. (The conclusion here being that studies are so underpowered that they should be finding a lot fewer significant effects).
- SubiculumCode 10y agopost hoc power calculations are inappropriate as they merely restate the p-value in a different form. No new information is gained.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]