read771

For a look at the American Statistical Associations Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice, Click here

Reading List

Modeling Overview

Here is an overview of the modeling approach without all of the data and formuli. I won't actually assign this, but it could prove useful if you need to help seeing the forest of modeling because of the classroom focus on the trees of computation.

Judd, C.M., McClelland, G.H. and Culhane, S.E. (1995). DATA ANALYSIS: Continuing issues in the everyday analysis of Psychological data. Annual review of Psychology, 46, 433-465. Annual Reviews Inc.

Prediction

Dawes, R.M., Faust, D. , and Meehl, P.E. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgement. Science, 243, 1668 - 1674.

Ethical Topics:

Traditional topics in research ethics usually focus on the treatment of human and animal subjects, plagerism, or data fabrication. Rosenthal suggests that topics such as poor research design and failing to conduct a possibly important research project should be considered in the context of research ethics. Pomerantz, Parkinson, and Sears provide an alternative perspective on Rosenthal's thoughs.

Rosenthal, R. (1994). Science and ethics in conducting, analyzing, and reporting psychological research. Psychological Science, 5,(3), 127-134.

Pomerantz, J.R. (1994). On criteria for ethics in science. Psychological Science, 5,(3), 135-136.

Parkinson, S. (1994). Scientific or ethical quality? Psychological Science, 5, (3), 137-138.

Sears, D.O. (1994). On Seperating church and lab. Psychological Science, 5, (4), 237-239.

In this artical, Kozlowski considers data analysis as an ethical topic.

Kozlowski, L. T. (1993). Data-Waste: The ethical challenge of the Underdone and Unfinished. APS Observer, July/August, 26-28.

Of Historical Intererst

For a large portion of this century there has been a tradition of prohabition against the use of exploratory data analytic techniques. Tukey was an early, and effective, advocate of exploratory methods in data analysis. This paper is still cited in the research methods and statistics literature. Consider the historical context as you comment on this paper.

Tukey, J. W. (1969). Analyzing data: Sanctification or detective work? American Psychologist, 24, 83-91.

Many folks are curious about the origins of the .05 level of statistical significance. Here are two articals that address that question.

Cowles, M., and Davis, C. (1982). On the origins of the .05 level of statistical significance. American Psychologist, 37(5), 553-558.

Pollard, P. and Richardson, J.T.E. (1987). On the probability of making Type I Errors. Psychological Bulletin, 102 (1), 159-163.

Null Hypothesis Testing: Good or Evil?

Chow, S. L. (1988). Significance test or effect size?. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 105-110.

Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth is round (p<.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.

Frick, R. W. (1995). Accepting the null hypothesis. Memory and Cognition, 23, 132-138.

Frick, R.W. (1996). The appropriate use of null hypothesis testing. Psychological Methods, 1 (4), 379-390.

Measurement Scales

Many of you have been taught that there are four scales of measurement, nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio. I prefer to think of these scale classifications as a general guideling, rather than as a rule. The next two readings will exlpain why.

Lord, F. (1953). On the statistical treatment of football numbers. American Psychologist, 8, 750-751.

Velleman, P.F. and Wilkinson, L. (1993). Nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio typologies are misleading. The American Statistician, 47(1), 65-72.

Unclassified Readings

Aiken, L.R. (1994). Some observations and recommendations concerning research methodology in the behavioral sciences. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, (4), 848-860.

Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304-1312.

Rosnow, R.L. and Rosenthal, R. (1996). Computing contrasts, effect sizes, and counternulls on other people's published data: General procedures for research consumers. Psychological Methods, 1 (4), 331-340.

Rosnow, R. L. and Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in Psychological Science. American Psychologist, 44, 1276-1284.

Schmidt, F. L. (1992). What do data really mean? American Psychologist, 47(10), 1173-1181.

Simon, H.A. (1992). What is an "explanation" of behavior? Psychological Science, 3, 150-161.

Sterling, T. D., Rosenbaum, W. L., and Weinkam, J. J. (1995). Publication Decisions Revisited: The effect of the outcome of statistical tests on the decision to publish and vice versa. The American Statistician, 49 (1), 108-112.

Watson, J.D. (1993, Sept. 24). Succeeding in Science: Some rules of thumb. Science, 261, 1812-1813.