Hmmm- We all know what zero chairs would be but does this meet the requirement of a true interval scale- barely. Integer differences which are translated into not possible interpolations (what is .387 chair corresponding to?). That's a problem. EXTREME restriction of range (not just restriction) is a real problem. Independence? I see lots of problems with the assumptions of ANOVA on this one. I think the use of non-parametric statistics is required. Perhaps some areas use the "opt outs" of Monte Carlo studies and robustness of the ANOVA etc. to get beyond reason here. But remember these are usually relying on the presence of large numbers whereas this study seems to rely on rather small ones. These small numbers are also, as Stephen and others have pointed out, include some VERY plausible selective attrition from the experimental but not the (oddly) combined control conditions. All in all this should not have been reported in this form. As others have shown there IS NO STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT effect there unless you blatantly manipulate these two control conditions into one. As a reviewer I could never approve of such and I'd certainly return any paper to a student an require the correction of the statistics. Maybe this could pass muster as a "thoughtful" early result but this is ONE study coming after a great deal of research and a large number of studies trying to find support for this effect. And as others have pointed out such results are highly likely to be transient. Perhaps, and I am really reaching here, there is enough suggestion to continue for long term study of the effects of extended education. But I'd certainly never approve funding for anything based on such manipulations and over-cooking of a very small difference. (Anyone gone to the trouble to look at the effect size here- it is easy to compute and quite informative. Why didn't any of the reviewers go to the trouble to do that I wonder- Is it that they already believe in the effect? Makes me wonder anyway.). :) Tim Shearon
-----Original Message-----
From: Wallace Dixon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 8/23/2004 11:26 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Cc:
Subject: Re: First Solid Evidence that the Study of Music Promotes
Intellectual Development
Don,
You lost me on this one. How is it NOT interval, even ratio, data? I
can see it would be easy enough to have qualms about restriction in range,
etc., or even qualms about using NHST at all, but I don't get how distance
in "seats away" isn't ratio? Sorry for being so dense.
Wally Dixon
On 8/23/04 1:12 PM, "Don Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I quite agree, and I wish it were the only lapse in APS editing. In
> Holland et al. "Don't Stand So Close to Me: The Effects of Self-Construal
> on Interpersonal Closeness" ( Psychological Science Volume 15 Issue 4 Page
> 237 - April 2004 ). They report the following methodology:
>
> "After completing the lexical decision task, the participants were asked
> to take a seat in a waiting area, ostensibly to give the experimenter some
> time to prepare the second part of the experiment. Four chairs were lined
> up in the waiting area, with a jacket hanging over the chair on the
> extreme left. This jacket suggested the presence of another person (Macrae
> & Johnston, 1998). The dependent variable was the distance, *** in number
> of chairs, *** (my emphasis) between the chair with the jacket on it and
> the chair that the participant chose to sit on."
>
> They then analyse the data as follows:
>
> "To examine the effects of self-construal and gender, we performed a 2
> (self-construal: independent vs. control)2 (gender: female vs. male)
> between-subjects analysis of variance on the distance between the
> participant's chair and the occupied chair. As expected, participants in
> the independent-self condition sat further away (M=2.07) than participants
> in the control condition (M=1.66), F(1, 73)=8.57, p<.01. 1 No main effect
> of gender was obtained. Also, no interaction effect was found."
>
> Now I have a hard time accepting that "number of chairs" is interval data.
> A non parametric analysis would have been far more appropriate. Editorial
> rigour just ain't what it used to be.
>
> -Don.
>
>
>
> Stephen Black said:
>>> Ronald C. Blue wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.psychologicalscience.org/media/releases/2004/pr040819.cfm
>>> First Solid Evidence that the Study of Music Promotes Intellectual
>>> Development
>>
>> and Chris Greeen commented:
>>
>>> Now none of this is out and out "wrong,"
>>
>> Oh, it's wrong all right. See earlier exchanges on this "solid
>> evidence", between Ken Steele and me, for example, at
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10749.html
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>> ___________________________________________________
>> Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
>> Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
>> Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7
>> Canada
>>
>> Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
>> TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at
>> http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wallace E. Dixon, Jr. |
Chair and Associate Professor | Understanding atomic physics is
of Psychology | child's play, compared with
Department of Psychology | understanding child's play.
East Tennessee State University | -Albert Einstein
Johnson City, TN 36714 |
(423) 439-6656 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<winmail.dat>>
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
