36: Statistical inconsistencies in published research

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 https://peerj.com/preprints/2748/ 'The grad student that didn't say no' blog post http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no The caffeine study http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-38744307 Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group lab handbook (see page 6 for open science practices) http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/expsych/documents/targ/TARG%20Handbook%20161128.pdf 21 word solution http://spsp.org/sites/default/files/dialogue_26(2).pdf Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast