4 ms·

Research Papers That Caught the Public's Attention in 2019

74 points by ArtWomb 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
alexfromapex 7y ago
What’s wrong with statistical significance?
- NPMaxwell 7y ago
  Here's paper that explains the current objections: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9 There is nothing wrong with statistical significance as long as no one is misled by it. Unfortunately, there is plenty of confusion around it and lots of people being misled. Here are two of the concerns mentioned in the article: 1) P > 0.05 is mistakenly taken as evidence of no effect. Tradition is that P > 0.05 should be interpreted as no evidence of anything. For example, run your study with two people and you will find that p > 0.05 for a relationship between exercise and obesity or between teeth brushing and cavities. 2) 0.05 is mistakenly perceived as an indicator of whether things are 100% likely to exist or 0% likely to exist. The challenge here is that the user is not comfortable thinking about probabilities. So a study finding that the difference in cholesterol between Seinfeld fans and Chris Rock fans is statistically significant at 0.0499 is reported as "Seinfeld raises cholesterol." I think that the central issue here is an objection to having to participate in a research community with people whose training in statistics did not allow them to understand the statistical tools they use in their work.
  - yellow_lead 7y ago
    Then these articles saying scientists are "Against statistical significance" are misleading. It sounds like scientists are more pro statistical significance than ever, so much so that they want it to be defined and interpreted correctly. I guess many people would benefit from taking a high school statistics class.
    - scarejunba 7y ago
      Well, in isolation p is problematic. For instance, without hypothesis pre-registration you have the obvious problem with negative results and publication bias.
- oarabbus_ 7y ago
  Some relevant links: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00874-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00874-8 https://www.fharrell.com/post/pval-litany/ https://www.fharrell.com/post/pval-litany/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-significant-problem-of-p-values/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-significant-p...
jimbob45 7y ago
>A Randomized Trial of E-Cigarettes versus Nicotine-Replacement Therapy Seems like this is going to be the most cited and controversial paper here. >Association Between Push-up Exercise Capacity and Future Cardiovascular Events Among Active Adult Men They had the push-ups done to a metronome but I don't see anywhere that it states that the participants were made to use one strict form of push-up. Not all push-ups are created equal (get your butt down!).
- agumonkey 7y ago
  Odd, never thought to use a metronome on push ups.. regular rhythm often helps. Thanks for the indirect tip.
js8 7y ago
> Out of 330 Game of Thrones characters, 186 die by the end of season 7, with survival ranging from 11 seconds to 57 hours and 15 minutes. This study of their characteristics reveals great potential for preventing violent deaths in the Game of Thrones world. Looking forward to a follow-up study which will hopefully include season 8..
- sadjad 7y ago
  Season 8 with plot armors thicker than The Wall...
louis8799 7y ago
TLDR of 100 researches: 1) Work out 3+ hour/week with as lease 2 weight training sections. 2) No processed food, no added sugar. More nuts, fruit, vegetables. 3) The world is fxxked because of climate change. 4) Sleep more.

74 points by ArtWomb 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

alexfromapex 7y ago

What’s wrong with statistical significance?

NPMaxwell 7y ago
Here's paper that explains the current objections: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9 There is nothing wrong with statistical significance as long as no one is misled by it. Unfortunately, there is plenty of confusion around it and lots of people being misled. Here are two of the concerns mentioned in the article: 1) P > 0.05 is mistakenly taken as evidence of no effect. Tradition is that P > 0.05 should be interpreted as no evidence of anything. For example, run your study with two people and you will find that p > 0.05 for a relationship between exercise and obesity or between teeth brushing and cavities. 2) 0.05 is mistakenly perceived as an indicator of whether things are 100% likely to exist or 0% likely to exist. The challenge here is that the user is not comfortable thinking about probabilities. So a study finding that the difference in cholesterol between Seinfeld fans and Chris Rock fans is statistically significant at 0.0499 is reported as "Seinfeld raises cholesterol." I think that the central issue here is an objection to having to participate in a research community with people whose training in statistics did not allow them to understand the statistical tools they use in their work.
- yellow_lead 7y ago
  Then these articles saying scientists are "Against statistical significance" are misleading. It sounds like scientists are more pro statistical significance than ever, so much so that they want it to be defined and interpreted correctly. I guess many people would benefit from taking a high school statistics class.
  - scarejunba 7y ago
    Well, in isolation p is problematic. For instance, without hypothesis pre-registration you have the obvious problem with negative results and publication bias.
oarabbus_ 7y ago
Some relevant links: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00874-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00874-8 https://www.fharrell.com/post/pval-litany/ https://www.fharrell.com/post/pval-litany/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-significant-problem-of-p-values/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-significant-p...

jimbob45 7y ago

>A Randomized Trial of E-Cigarettes versus Nicotine-Replacement Therapy Seems like this is going to be the most cited and controversial paper here. >Association Between Push-up Exercise Capacity and Future Cardiovascular Events Among Active Adult Men They had the push-ups done to a metronome but I don't see anywhere that it states that the participants were made to use one strict form of push-up. Not all push-ups are created equal (get your butt down!).

agumonkey 7y ago
Odd, never thought to use a metronome on push ups.. regular rhythm often helps. Thanks for the indirect tip.

js8 7y ago

> Out of 330 Game of Thrones characters, 186 die by the end of season 7, with survival ranging from 11 seconds to 57 hours and 15 minutes. This study of their characteristics reveals great potential for preventing violent deaths in the Game of Thrones world. Looking forward to a follow-up study which will hopefully include season 8..

sadjad 7y ago
Season 8 with plot armors thicker than The Wall...

louis8799 7y ago

TLDR of 100 researches: 1) Work out 3+ hour/week with as lease 2 weight training sections. 2) No processed food, no added sugar. More nuts, fruit, vegetables. 3) The world is fxxked because of climate change. 4) Sleep more.