Phil McAleer

@philmcaleer.bsky.social

Senior Lecturer at the University of Glasgow, School of Psychology and Neuroscience. Focussed on the scholarship of teaching and learning around statistics, data skills, research methods, and assessment and feedback. Dable in voice perception.

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.

Hi all! Anybody know of recentish data on researcher perceptions of open science practices that ask questions like, "I think it's good for the field when studies are preregistered"? I found Houtkoop et al (2018) on data sharing, but am hoping for data on other practices and more recent!

Does anyone know of any really good and open source genealogy websites or webtools? Just thinking with the development of tools to help source journal articles and their connections, this might be possible for tracing families. Any suggestions welcome.

I was so lucky as Glasgow increased their paternity leave from 2 weeks to 4 weeks on January 1st. Part of me feels guilty as friends could not benefit from that. I genuinely don’t know how we would have coped if I had to go back after 2 weeks, so employers, sort yourselves out.

What do you do when your media org is captured? You start your own. Introducing....The Nerve!!! @thenerve-news.bsky.social We're all-female, journalist-owned & launching next week. Please help us build a truly independent, progressive new media!👊👊👊

Press Gazette@pressgazette.co.uk · 11mo ago

Former Observer big-hitters inc @carolecadwalla.bsky.social launch new title The Nerve with redundancy payouts After Observer sale: "We decided to launch a title that the journalists themselves would own, that would be truly independent" pressgazette.co.uk/news/former-...