Main content



Loading wiki pages...

Wiki Version:
**Full show notes** 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 preprint - The GRIM test to detect inconsistencies - The researchers that accidently administered the equivalent of 300 cups of coffee to study participants - How do we prevent inconsistent reporting? - 21 word solution for research transparency - Journals mandating statistical inconsistency checks, such as 'statcheck' Links The pre-print 'The grad student that didn't say no' blog post…-never-said-no The caffeine study Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group lab handbook (see page 6 for open science practices)…book%20161128.pdf 21 word solution Facebook page Twitter account
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.