Psychology tends to get to data from a medium number of trials, about 100, from a medium number of subjects, about 30. Occasionally, psychology, particularly perception and sensation research, will get a large number of trials, say 10,000, from a few subjects, say 4 (including the first author).
What happens if you go to the edge. How about a large number of trials (a million trials would be a good start) from one person? How about 1 trial from a large number of people (again, I would start with a million)? Those edges are easier than ever to access via the internet. Using the "long tail" of the internet has been prototyped in science by the Galaxy Zoo project. It is time for psychology to join the game.
June 27, 2011
June 22, 2011
Required Reading
The reading list for seminars and conferences sometimes border on the ridiculous. Since everything is electronic, it is additively easy to find and share information. There is always another article that is interesting and possibly relevant. I'm a fast reader but I shepherd my superpower in this instance. In my experience, there are more important aspects to a successful seminar and conference attendance than doing all the required reading.
I show up, my secret weapon. First, that means I am physical at the conference or seminar. Second, I am mentally there. I have "nothing on my mind", a Getting Things Done reference. I have my 8 hours of sleep. While I am physically in the room, I not checking my email, twittering, or looking up what is happening elsewhere. I know this is where I need to be in the universe. I feel like I'm cheating when I fully present at conferences or seminars, even though sometimes I don't all the mandatory reading.
Even though I just made an argument for not reading, sometimes it is better if you show up prepared. Here are my tips & tricks:
1. Read all the abstracts
2. Rank order the articles
3. Read the 1st paragraph of the general discussion
4. Summarize the article in your own words
5. Read the methods
6. Create a list of limitations based on the methods
7. Interpret the figures
8. Read the results
9. Read the discussion
10. Create a list of limitations based on the discussion
11. Read the introduction
12. Create a list of research they should have cited (mostly your own!)
I show up, my secret weapon. First, that means I am physical at the conference or seminar. Second, I am mentally there. I have "nothing on my mind", a Getting Things Done reference. I have my 8 hours of sleep. While I am physically in the room, I not checking my email, twittering, or looking up what is happening elsewhere. I know this is where I need to be in the universe. I feel like I'm cheating when I fully present at conferences or seminars, even though sometimes I don't all the mandatory reading.
Even though I just made an argument for not reading, sometimes it is better if you show up prepared. Here are my tips & tricks:
1. Read all the abstracts
2. Rank order the articles
3. Read the 1st paragraph of the general discussion
4. Summarize the article in your own words
5. Read the methods
6. Create a list of limitations based on the methods
7. Interpret the figures
8. Read the results
9. Read the discussion
10. Create a list of limitations based on the discussion
11. Read the introduction
12. Create a list of research they should have cited (mostly your own!)
June 1, 2011
Cognitive Chew Toy
Every researcher I know has a “Cognitive Chew Toy.” A cognitive chew toy is an aspect of research that you love to think, talk, and obsess about. I have two cognitive chew toys, designing studies and creating workflows. I love both. They are a type of thought experiment that will be manifested in the real world. I think they are critical foundations to successful research. However, there is a dark side. Those “fun” aspects need to be balanced with the other facets of research that are less delicious but equally important.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)