Skip to content
Archive of posts filed under the Miscellaneous Science category.

A message from the vice chairman of surgery at Columbia University: “Garcinia Camboja. It may be the simple solution you’ve been looking for to bust your body fat for good.”

Should Columbia University fire this guy just cos he says things like this: “You may think magic is make believe but this little bean has scientists saying they’ve found the magic weight loss cure for every body type—it’s green coffee extract.” “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s […]

Imagining p<.05 triggers increased publication

We’ve all had that experience of going purposefully from one hypothesis to another, only to get there and forget why we made the journey. Four years ago, researcher Daryl Bem and his colleagues stripped this effect down, showing that the simple act of obtaining a statistically significant comparison induces publication in a top journal. Now […]

Paul Meehl continues to be the boss

Lee Sechrest writes: Here is a remarkable paper, not well known, by Paul Meehl. My research group is about to undertake a fresh discussion of it, which we do about every five or ten years. The paper is now more than a quarter of a century old but it is, I think, dramatically pertinent to […]

“In general I think these literatures have too much focus on data analysis and not enough on data collection.”

Mike Zyphur pointed me to an article appearing in Psychological Bulletin with a meta-analysis of ovulatory cycle effects: Title: Do Women’s Mate Preferences Change Across the Ovulatory Cycle? A Meta-Analytic Review Authors: Gildersleeve, K; Haselton, MG; Fales, MR Source: PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN , 140 (5):1205-1259; SEP 2014 Abstract: Scientific interest in whether women experience changes across […]

The illusion of the illusion of control

Yesterday we discussed the sad and disturbing career of psychology researcher Ellen Langer, who was was famous (to me) for her 1975 article on the illusion of control, “defined as an expectancy of a personal success probability inappropriately higher than the objective probability would warrant.” And then, in her own research, she herself became subject […]

Ellen Langer: expert on, and victim of, the illusion of control

It all started when Lee Sechrest pointed me to this post by James Coyne. Sechrest wrote: I know you have enough to do, and if you do not get to this…well, no problems. It is a blog by Jim Coyne taking apart a “classic” study in social psychology, originally published in the early ’70s. Implausible […]

James Watson sez: Cancer cure is coming in minus 14 years!

From a recent news article by Laura Helmuth, I learned this amusing fact about DNA-discoverer James Watson: “he told a New York Times reporter 16 years ago that a researcher was ‘going to cure cancer in two years.’” Here’s the link to the NYT story, dated 3 May 1998: Within a year, if all goes […]

Discussion with Steven Pinker connecting cognitive psychology research to the difficulties of writing

Following up on my discussion of Steven Pinker’s writing advice, Pinker and I had an email exchange that cleared up some issues and raised some new ones. In particular, Pinker made a connection between the difficulty of writing and some research findings in cognitive psychology. I think this connection is really cool—I’ve been thinking and […]

How a clever analysis of health survey data became transformed into bogus feel-good medical advice

Jonathan Falk sends a message with the heading, “Garden of forking paths, p value abuse, questionable causality, you name it,” this link to an article in JAMA Internal Medicine, and the following remarks: Unfortunately, I can only see the first page of this article, but it seems to contain all the usual suspects. (a) Forking […]

“The Statistical Crisis in Science”: My talk this Thurs at the Harvard psychology department

Noon Thursday, January 29, 2015, in William James Hall 765 room 1: The Statistical Crisis in Science Andrew Gelman, Dept of Statistics and Dept of Political Science, Columbia University Top journals in psychology routinely publish ridiculous, scientifically implausible claims, justified based on “p < 0.05.” And this in turn calls into question all sorts of […]