Ian Hussey
LightNews LightNews
banner
ianhussey.mmmdata.io
Ian Hussey
@ianhussey.mmmdata.io
3.7K followers 960 following 1.2K posts

Meta-scientist and psychologist. Senior lecturer @unibe.ch‬. Chief recommender @error.reviews. "Jumped up punk who hasn't earned his stripes." All views a product of my learning history. If behaviorism did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it. .. more

Videos
Psychology 66%
Sociology 10%
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
ianhussey.mmmdata.io
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · Jun 29
I have managed to abstract the template for replies to critiques.
A reply to critique In this reply to the recent critique of our article, we: mischaracterize the critique; mischaracterize our own original claims; respond only to the peripheral arguments while remaining silent about the critique’s most devastating points; claim that the issues raised do not affect our core conclusions, regardless of whether this is the case or not; radically change the implied generality of our original claims; commit ad hominem while accusing others of it; and leverage the fact that we are likely to have the last word to generally muddy the waters.

Reposted by Ian Hussey

rmcelreath.bsky.social
Richard McElreath 🐈‍⬛ @rmcelreath.bsky.social · 11h
An extraordinary example of a paper that cannot logically address its estimand: effect of restricting under-18 playtime. But sample has no age data, and most of the sample is adults. Reviewer #3 even noted this, and authors agreed. See link in quoted for details.
You said: “It’s not clear from the text why the authors believe that the youth effect is underestimated. If the youth population is about 6% of the sample, this means the first stage effects of the policy change should affect the tails of the distribution. So any estimates of effects on the full population which is primarily adults do not necessarily reflect what is happening with the youth. Perhaps clarifying what is meant with “underestimated” is sufficient, or perhaps the authors meant that the increases in adult utilization is underestimated. As it stands, I think “underestimated” is incorrect because the youth effects could be negative, positive, or neutral and we have no idea what the magnitude is.” Our response: Your point is extremely well-taken: We have removed the offending text from the manuscript (i.e. we have removed ‘Thus, the figures generated here will naturally underestimate changes to the prevalence of heavy playtime amongst young people.’). This is in line with the more general revision of language throughout the text to tend to be more conservative.

ianhussey.mmmdata.io
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 23h
What’s the date that people celebrate the anniversary of the tweet about “with large enough samples you don’t need randomisation”?

mkarhulahti.bsky.social
Veli-Matti Karhulahti @mkarhulahti.bsky.social · 1d
bigger-N papers collect citations & make headlines so it's not surprising that journals like nature publish those regardless of quality-- but tbh that's all rational for a publishing business