Tessera
Folgen

Dario Sidhu

@dariosidhu.bsky.social

Political science PhD @ UCLA, studying barriers to evidence-based policy. Previously @ Penn, BIT, Evidence Action, PIIE. 🇦🇹 🇨🇦 Website: www.dariosidhu.com

6 Posts902 Follower1614 Folgt
Ryan Briggs@ryancbriggs.net · 7mo ago

I have a new paper. We look at ~all stats articles in political science post-2010 & show that 94% have abstracts that claim to reject a null. Only 2% present only null results. This is hard to explain unless the research process has a filter that only lets rejections through.

It must be very hard to publish null results Publication practices in the social sciences act as a filter that favors statistically significant results over null findings. While the problem of selection on significance (SoS) is well-known in theory, it has been difficult to measure its scope empirically, and it has been challenging to determine how selection varies across contexts. In this article, we use large language models to extract granular and validated data on about 100,000 articles published in over 150 political science journals from 2010 to 2024. We show that fewer than 2% of articles that rely on statistical methods report null-only findings in their abstracts, while over 90% of papers highlight significant results. To put these findings in perspective, we develop and calibrate a simple model of publication bias. Across a range of plausible assumptions, we find that statistically significant results are estimated to be one to two orders of magnitude more likely to enter the published record than null results. Leveraging metadata extracted from individual articles, we show that the pattern of strong SoS holds across subfields, journals, methods, and time periods. However, a few factors such as pre-registration and randomized experiments correlate with greater acceptance of null results. We conclude by discussing implications for the field and the potential of our new dataset for investigating other questions about political science.
Eva Vivalt@evavivalt.bsky.social · 9mo ago

🚨 New working paper! How well do people predict the results of studies? @sdellavi.bsky.social and I leverage data from the first 100 studies to have been posted on the SSPP, containing 1,482 key questions, on which over 50,000 forecasts were placed. Some surprising results below.... 🧵👇

Bild
Patrick Wyman@patrickwyman.bsky.social · 11mo ago

Today's the big day, friends - my new book, Lost Worlds: The Rise and Fall of Human Societies from the Ice Age to the Bronze Age, is available for preorder! Smash that link and purchase from your retailer of choice, if that's the kind of thing you're into. www.harpercollins.com/products/los...

Lost Worlds

The creator of the hit podcast Tides of History offers a new look at humanity’s deep past, showing us how our world was built not by inevitability, but by t...

harpercollins.com

Dina Pomeranz@dinapomeranz.bsky.social · 11mo ago

We're hiring a research associate or research manager for a project in the DRC! This is a great opportunity for anyone who is interested in gaining very hands-on research and work experience in a low-income country in partnership with the local government. Also a great preparation for a PhD.

Bild
"Online Rent-a-Sage" Bret Devereaux@bretdevereaux.bsky.social · 12mo ago

For as often as I get asked "What do you think of Graber and Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything" I need to just have a blog post titled, "What I think of The Dawn of Everything" which is just a link to @walterscheidel.bsky.social's devastating review (here: escholarship.org/uc/item/9jj9...).

Resetting History’s Dial? A Critique of David Graeber and David Wengrow, The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity

Author(s): Scheidel, Walter | Abstract: Commentary on David Graeber and David Wengrow 2021.  The Dawn of Everything . New York: Penguin.

escholarship.org