36: Statistical inconsistencies in published research - a podcast by Dan Quintana

In episode 34 we covered a blog post that highlighted questionable analytical approaches in psychology. That post mentioned four studies that resulted from this approach, which a team of researchers took a closer look into. Dan and James discuss the statistical inconsistencies that the authors reported in a recent preprint.
Some of the topics covered:Trump (of course)
A summary of the preprintThe GRIM test to detect inconsistencies
The researchers that accidently administered the equivalent of 300 cups of coffee to study participantsHow do we prevent inconsistent reporting?
21 word solution for research transparencyJournals mandating statistical inconsistency checks, such as 'statcheck'
LinksThe pre-print
https://peerj.com/preprints/2748/'The grad student that didn't say no' blog post
http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-noThe caffeine study
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-38744307Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group lab handbook (see page 6 for open science practices)
http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/expsych/documents/targ/TARG%20Handbook%20161128.pdf21 word solution
http://spsp.org/sites/default/files/dialogue_26(2).pdfFacebook page
https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/Twitter account
https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Further episodes of Everything Hertz

Further podcasts by Dan Quintana

Website of Dan Quintana