Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You are entirely correct (p< 0.05). To be fair, psychology is a broad church. Within it, we have people like Jacob Cohen, Daniel Kahneman and Tversky (mathematical psychologists awarded a Nobel in Economics).

But apparently we also have Susan Fiske. I think that the real difficulty with psychology is that people care too much. Its a little easier to be objective around the decay of atomic particles than about the intelligence of different genders and races.

Additionally, many psychologists are not comfortable with statistics. A large proportion went into psychology to avoid maths, and are somewhat disappointed to discover that this does not work.

So they follow guidelines, and paste tables from SPSS into MS Word (no automation for some reason), and stuff like this happens.

They don't use cross-validation and they are too much in love with their models, and the theory that said models facilitate.

I suppose this was a pretty long-winded way to say "Not all psychologists!"

Cohen, J: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~sternh/courses/210/cohen94_pval.pdf (The World is Round (p< 0.05))



An interesting recent complaint about Fiske doesn't entirely spare Kahneman:

http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-he...


> I think that the real difficulty with psychology is that people care too much.

Yup. There are powerful social forces which act to dissuade psychologists from publishing research which opposes to feelings of their peer group. One can't speak an inconvenient truth.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: