Why hypothesis testers should spend less time testing hypotheses

Scheel, Anne M.; Tiokhin, Leonid; Isager, Peder Mortvedt; Lakens, Daniël

doi:10.31234/osf.io/vekpu

Cited by 56 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 63 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We expect that these data will provide a baseline as to how individuals with TBI are responding to the pandemic and will begin a derivation chain informing future hypothesis-driven research in this area. 28…”

Section: Analysis and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury

Morrow

Patel

Duff

2021

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To identify the consequences of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI), with particular attention to unique effects for individuals with chronic disability. Design: Individuals with and without a history of TBI completed a web-based survey. Setting: Participants were recruited from the Vanderbilt Brain Injury Patient Registry in Nashville, TN, and completed the survey from their homes between May and June 2020, during social distancing related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants: Participants (NZ47) in the chronic phase of moderate-severe TBI (>6mo postinjury) and 51 noninjured comparison (NC) peers completed the survey. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Participants, or respondents, answered a mix of multiple choice and free text questions about how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected their work, education, medical care, social communication, sources of information and decision making, and mental and physical well-being. Individuals with TBI also answered questions about how TBI has affected their experiences of the pandemic. Results: As a group, respondents with TBI reported less pandemic-related behavior change (eg, daily habits, virtual social visits, and masking) than NC peers. Both NCs and respondents with TBI identified health care providers as trusted sources of public health information. One-third of individuals with TBI indicated that brain injury has made coping with the pandemic more difficult, and respondents identified mental health challenges and social isolation as key barriers. Conclusions: These results suggest that health care providers should look for ways to provide tailored education and reduce social isolation for individuals with disability during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss several direct suggestions from participant responses.

show abstract

Section: Analysis and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury

Morrow

Patel

Duff

2021

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For them, machine learning is simply useful because it can already provide solutions and show what ‘works’ (and what not)—and that irrespective of hypothesis testing or building towards theory. Nonetheless, both types of scientists would (hopefully) agree that we need proper conceptual precision, logical reasoning, valid measures, and good data quality to be at all able to properly ‘test’ any hypotheses (see Scheel, Tiokhin, Isager, & Lakens, 2020) or solve any problem, respectively. There are recent calls for more formalization and theory–building in psychology (e.g.…”

Section: Some Observations and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A (More) Behavioural Science of Personality in the Age of Multi–Modal Sensing, Big Data, Machine Learning, and Artificial Intelligence

Rauthmann¹

2020

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over more than a decade ago, Baumeister, Vohs, and Funder (2007) asked: whatever happened to actual behaviour in psychology? Shortly after, Furr (2009a) published a target article here in EJP on personality psychology as a truly behavioural science and discussed the (low) prevalence, meaning, importance, and measurement of behavioural assessment (see also Furr, 2009b). Now, it is time to take stock: have we, as personality psychologists, moved towards using more behavioural assessment and understanding what people are actually doing in their personal, social, and occupational lives? Has new technology helped us achieve these goals?From the available literature, it would seem that behavioural measurement has been slowly on the rise but also that we still only rarely use actual behaviour as a data source (Nave, Feeney, & Furr, 2018). However, rapid technological advancements, the digitization of daily life, the ubiquity of data-gathering tools (e.g. smartphones), and the introduction of multi-modal sensing methodology, 'big data' applications, machine learning, and artificial intelligence approaches to psychological science promise more and perhaps even better behavioural assessment than was possible decades or even just some years ago. For example, what people speak (e.g. from audio snippets), write (e.g. on online social networks, text-massaging apps, and emails), or do (e.g. captured in videos via minicameras, geospatial movements via GPS, app usage on the smartphone and internet, gameplay, or pictures of activities posted on online social media platforms) in their daily lives yields intensive and massive amounts of data that need to be mined and modelled appropriately (Blake,

show abstract

“…If the majority of research in a top journal is not explicitly testing predictions derived from theory, then perhaps it exists to explore and describe interesting effects. There is certainly nothing wrong with a descriptive approach, and this aim of psychology has been suggested for at least half a century (20,42,43).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009-2019)

McPhetres¹,

Albayrak‐Aydemir²,

Mendes³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dominant belief is that science progresses by testing theories and moving towards theoretical consensus. While it’s implicitly assumed that psychology operates in this manner, critical discussions claim that the field suffers from a lack of cumulative theory. To examine this paradox, we analysed research published in Psychological Science from 2009-2019 (N = 2,225). We found mention of 359 theories in-text, most were referred to only once. Only 53.66% of all manuscripts included the word theory, and only 15.33% explicitly claim to test predictions derived from theories. We interpret this to suggest that most psychological research is not driven by theory, nor can it be contributing to cumulative theory building. These data provide insight into the kinds of research psychologists are conducting and raises questions about the role of theory in the psychological sciences.

show abstract

Why hypothesis testers should spend less time testing hypotheses

Cited by 56 publications

References 63 publications

Disability and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury

Disability and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey of Individuals With Traumatic Brain Injury

A (More) Behavioural Science of Personality in the Age of Multi–Modal Sensing, Big Data, Machine Learning, and Artificial Intelligence

A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009-2019)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About