Often this kind of work also suffers from significantly useless small samples with attrition bias to boot. I think it is why developmental psychology is one of the methodologically challanged fields in psychology aside from social psychology and evolutionary psychology. Beyond that, the freedom of researchers to create contradicting find…
Often this kind of work also suffers from significantly useless small samples with attrition bias to boot. I think it is why developmental psychology is one of the methodologically challanged fields in psychology aside from social psychology and evolutionary psychology. Beyond that, the freedom of researchers to create contradicting findings by slightly increasing or decreasing the complexity of the tests is also rather concerning. I have had several discussions with some researchers in pedagogy surrounding certain aspects of development. And for most of their findings you can find contradicting findings. And weirdly enough a lot of those findings are surrounding topics of innateness. And no it's not just the social justice leaning researchers that are creating such contradicting findings. It's from all sides of the discussion. And almost all of that research suffers from relatively severe methodological problems that could casts doubts on the findings. And not just the cliché small samples, convenient samples and so on. It goes all the way up to misunderstanding fundamental statistics p-hacking and so on. Just what was happening in neuroscience with fMRI studies like you wrote in the article and all the problems of social psychology following the start of the bemm studies that led to the replication crisis in 2010.
Often this kind of work also suffers from significantly useless small samples with attrition bias to boot. I think it is why developmental psychology is one of the methodologically challanged fields in psychology aside from social psychology and evolutionary psychology. Beyond that, the freedom of researchers to create contradicting findings by slightly increasing or decreasing the complexity of the tests is also rather concerning. I have had several discussions with some researchers in pedagogy surrounding certain aspects of development. And for most of their findings you can find contradicting findings. And weirdly enough a lot of those findings are surrounding topics of innateness. And no it's not just the social justice leaning researchers that are creating such contradicting findings. It's from all sides of the discussion. And almost all of that research suffers from relatively severe methodological problems that could casts doubts on the findings. And not just the cliché small samples, convenient samples and so on. It goes all the way up to misunderstanding fundamental statistics p-hacking and so on. Just what was happening in neuroscience with fMRI studies like you wrote in the article and all the problems of social psychology following the start of the bemm studies that led to the replication crisis in 2010.