Andrew Gelman jumps up and down on the corpse of psychology

Psychology is in quite the crisis mode now and some of the old guard are having a hard time dealing with the fact that social media is so much faster and free-er than traditional peer review.

Talking about one of the apparently bad psychology papers, Gelman says:

And that’s why the authors’ claim that fixing the errors “does not change the conclusion of the paper” is both ridiculous and all too true. It’s ridiculous because one of the key claims is entirely based on a statistically significant p-value that is no longer there. But the claim is true because the real “conclusion of the paper” doesn’t depend on any of its details—all that matters is that there’s something, somewhere, that has p less than .05, because that’s enough to make publishable, promotable claims about “the pervasiveness and persistence of the elderly stereotype” or whatever else they want to publish that day.

When the authors protest that none of the errors really matter, it makes you realize that, in these projects, the data hardly matter at all.

What has happened down here is the winds have changed – Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
Someone sent me this article by psychology professor Susan Fiske, scheduled to appear in the APS Observer, a magazine of the Association for Psychological Science. The article made me a little bit sad, and I was inclined to just keep my response short and sweet, but then it seemed worth the trouble to give some …

Leave a Reply