Author Archives: pigee

What happens when the authors of studies linking candidate gene polymorphisms to response to drug consumption tried to replicate their own research? As many of you know, the saga of replication problems continues unabated in social and personality psychology. The … Continue reading →

This week in PIG-IE we discussed the just published paper by an all-star team of “skeptical” researchers that examined the reliability of neuroscience research.  It was a chance to take a break from our self-flagellation to see whether some of our … Continue reading →

This is a guest post by Lee Jussim.  It was originally posted as a comment to the Beginning of History Effect, but it seemed too important to leave as a comment. It has been slightly edited to help it stand … Continue reading →

In the post about the Beginning of History Effect, I used candidate gene research as a case in point to illustrate how unreplicable research can get lodged in the scientific literature and how it is difficult to then dislodge.  A … Continue reading →

Does (effect) Size Matter?. A highly related and important post from David Funder

Doctor, my eyes have seen the years And the slow parade of fears without crying Now I want to understand I have done all that I could To see the evil and the good without hiding You must help me … Continue reading →

Just recently, the Chronicle of Higher Education ran a piece on what it takes to be successful in an academic career.  It was a pleasant essay, which emphasized some of the usual suspects like industriousness and the like, but it felt … Continue reading →

The good: Our European Journal of Personality paper proposing ways to improve the replicability of research in psychology is in press.  You can find a copy here.  The EJP editor is soliciting comments and the entire package should be published … Continue reading →

For this week’s PIG-IE session we have the opportunity to read a draft of a paper from Richard Lucas (MSU; richard.e.lucas@gmail.com) and Nicole Lawless (U of Oregon) testing the relation between the weather and life satisfaction–in 1 million people. The paper … Continue reading →

Some of you know that some of us (namely Brent), are more than skeptical about “gene for” studies linking candidate genes to personality and/or any other phenotype.  What you may not know is that Brent is now enthusiastic (for the … Continue reading →