Tessera
Folgen

Patrik Michaelsen

@michaelsen.bsky.social

Post doc in political science University of Gothenburg. Behavioral public policy, conservation policy, transparency, behavior change, open science www.patrikmichaelsen.com

12 Posts1377 Follower2124 Folgt
Graham Kendall@grahamkendall.bsky.social · 2mo ago

Looking at SJS (SCopus Journal Services), which offers publication services. The publication head is Dr. Fiona Wilson. We did a revrse image search on her photograph and this is what was returned (2nd image). 🧵

BildBild
Michael Okun@michael-okun.bsky.social · 2mo ago

I’ve officially resigned as Associate Editor for Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience. It used to be a reputable journal, but became a case study in how forced automation destroys academic integrity. 👇

Dan Quintana@dsquintana.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Selecting an effect size for power analysis is hard. Many researchers fall back on Cohen's thresholds, but they have no empirical basis and vary wildly by field. Our new paper offers a better option: field-specific effect size distributions built from meta-analytic data doi.org/10.3758/s134...

Abstract Effect sizes are useful for understanding the magnitude of study results and for planning new studies via power analysis. However, despite their wide usage, effect sizes are often misinterpreted. This is mostly due to an over-reliance on general effect size benchmarks that were not intended for broad application across diverse research fields. Inaccurate effect size interpretations can lead to incorrect conclusions about the magnitude of study results and incorrect sample size estimates, thereby increasing the likelihood of false-positive results. This article introduces the ESDist R package, which is designed to calculate empirically derived effect-size benchmarks or a range of reliably detectable empirical effect sizes for a specific research question or field of interest by computing effect size distributions (ESDs). This package can be used on data that can be easily extracted from pre-existing meta-analyses to help researchers more accurately plan new studies or to better understand how an individual study might relate to other studies in their field. ESDist includes a set of features that make it easy to use in a priori power analysis. Moreover, the package includes a feature for estimating effect size benchmarks that account for publication bias and are weighted by effect sizes' variances, which addresses existing limitations of using ESDs for study planning or interpretation.
Brian Nosek@briannosek.bsky.social · 5mo ago

SCORE, a collaboration of 865 researchers, is now released as three papers in Nature, six preprints, and a lot of data (cos.io/score/). SCORE examined repeatability of findings from the social-behavioral sciences and tested whether human and automated methods could predict replicability.

SCORE | Center for Open Science

SCORE shows that there is no shortcut to producing credible research findings, and there is no single indicator of trustworthiness. Research progress depends on transparency, rigor, and establishing r...

cos.io

Julia M. Rohrer@dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 5mo ago

Psychology has a whole cottage industry in which people come up with some construct that is essentially "attitudes/beliefs/expectations/feelings about X", and then the central claim is that this construct is a super important determinant of future X outcomes.>

Marcus Crede@marcuscrede.bsky.social · 6mo ago

We recently submitted a commentary on a very influential meta-analysis. We found that: 1) 40% of relevant literature had not been identified because of lazy search, 2) a few large N included studies did not meet stated inclusion criteria, and 3) that almost all sig. moderator findings were wrong.

Daniel Lakens@lakens.bsky.social · 6mo ago

If you set out to test a hypothesis, you should preregister it. If you deviate from a preregistration, report a table with all deviations, and evaluate the consequences for the validity and severity of the test. As a reviewer, ask for such a table! online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...

When and How to Deviate From a Preregistration

As the practice of preregistration becomes more common, researchers need guidance in how to report deviations from their preregistered statistical analysis plan. A principled approach to the use of…

online.ucpress.edu

Ryan Briggs@ryancbriggs.net · 6mo ago

It's ironic to see a discipline care **so much** about unbiasedness (causal inference!) at the level of a single test but then have a research production system and culture that is basically a ferocious bias generation machine. This is not good.

Ryan Briggs@ryancbriggs.net · 6mo 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.
Ian Hussey@ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 7mo ago

The Iowa Gambling Task is an extreme example of Jingle Fallacy and schmeasurement. In 100 articles we found 244 different ways of scoring it, 177 were never reused. Correlations between them range -.99 to .99. At the same time, we show meta-analyses combine these results as if they’re equivalent.

Annika Külpmann@anniria.bsky.social · 7mo ago

How many versions of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) exist? And how much does this affect research using the IGT? More than you might think. 🧵

OneOcean Flotilla@oceanflotilla.bsky.social · 7mo ago

Across 8 countries, large majorities back the #30x30 goal. Support grows when all nations share protection duties, richer nations pay more, more countries join in and “buying protection abroad” is barred. At home, people prefer nature-first siting and polluter-pays funding. https://bit.ly/4jALfRy

PNAS

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) - an authoritative source of high-impact, original research that broadly spans...

bit.ly

Patrik Michaelsen@michaelsen.bsky.social · 12mo ago

New: Strong global support for the 30x30 conservation target *Data from 5 continents (N=12k) show 82% in support of 30x30 *2 experiments find highly consistent expansion policy preferences, incl. prioritization of nature and rich countries bearing higher costs Out now OA in @pnas.org. Viz. below.

Mass support for conserving 30% of the Earth by 2030: Experimental evidence from five continents | PNAS

Rapid global expansion of protected areas is critical for safeguarding biodiversity but depends on political action for successful implementation. ...

pnas.org

Journal of Public Policy@jpublicpolicy.bsky.social · last yr.

A new blog post by Lauren Yehle, @michaelsen.bsky.social, Niklas Harring, and Sverker C. Jagers - t.ly/cw_CR ! The article “Conservation for nature and wildlife’s sake: the effects of (non-)anthropocentric ethical justifications on policy acceptability” is available here: t.ly/HWHfQ

Conservation for Nature and Wildlife’s Sake: The Effects of (Non-)Anthropocentric Ethical Justifications on Policy Acceptability « Political Science and International Relations# « Cambridge Core Blog

Human activities continue to degrade nature and encroach on wildlife’s habitats and undeveloped open areas. Concern for the environment appears to be increasing as indicated by numerous countries sign...

t.ly