RT @deaneckles: An elaboration on an argument I've made: "many analysts" exercises have suffered from poorly defined research questions tha…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
An elaboration on an argument I've made: "many analysts" exercises have suffered from poorly defined research questions that hint at causality, but don't explicitly invoke it (or provide data that would make causal inference clearly credible)
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
"Nonrigorous social research that does not start with a clear research question provides divergent results. However, rigorous social science research is able to provide a more consistent answer."
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
I love when I see a paper take an idea I’ve been stumbling to articulate for a few years and so brilliantly explain it. I’ve been describing the variance in findings as due to the analysts’ lack of content area expertise, but lack of specificity in the e
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
Interesting re-analysis of Many Analysts paper, showing importance of clear research questions.
RT @BrianNosek: New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https…
New paper by @KAuspurg and Josef Bruderl critiques interpretations of Many Analysts paper with multiverse reanalysis: https://t.co/ddJgxgzgUP Original: https://t.co/cp28ZE0cyh https://t.co/MhN9aC48iJ
An interesting perspective on the “Many Analysts, One Data Set” project: https://t.co/D23ORF7KnO https://t.co/8n0cUvfZYi
Fascinating update to a fascinating project on replicating in the social sciences.
Very nice paper demonstrating estimand uncertainty on the top of model (estimation) uncertainty https://t.co/KZe2vewt4a
RT @BreznauNate: A second look at the results of the pioneering many analysts study testing racial bias in referees shows how theory, simul…
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
RT @BreznauNate: A second look at the results of the pioneering many analysts study testing racial bias in referees shows how theory, simul…
A second look at the results of the pioneering many analysts study testing racial bias in referees shows how theory, simulation and scrutinizing the precision of a hypothesis can tighten up the results https://t.co/SQk588GSpe
RT @Na_Wehl: "social science research needs to be more precise in its estimands to become credible." @KAuspurg & Brüderl in @SociusJournal…
"social science research needs to be more precise in its estimands to become credible." @KAuspurg & Brüderl in @SociusJournal ⬇️ & fits nicely with recent @ASR paper by @IanLundberg1 @beckyj1 @b_m_stewart "what is your estimand" not only relevant
RT @OxSoc: Yes, yes & yes again! Getting the question right is 90% of the battle. Apart from anything else it stops you wasting time on thi…
The original article made me reflect on the robustness of methods in the social sciences and I'm looking forward to reading this.
Yes, yes & yes again! Getting the question right is 90% of the battle. Apart from anything else it stops you wasting time on things that can't, even in principle, be answered. But, there are whole swathes of the discipline heavily invested in keeping t
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
Another paper showing the need to define precise estimands prior running quantitative analyses
RT @SociusJournal: NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts,…
NEW #OA research - "Has the Credibility of the Social Sciences Been Credibly Destroyed? Reanalyzing the 'Many Analysts, One Data Set' Project" by Katrin Auspurg and Josef Brüderl is out now! https://t.co/8VBEMBIIhS #soctwitter #openscience #openaccess #o