Abstract Details
Activity Number:
|
43
|
Type:
|
Contributed
|
Date/Time:
|
Sunday, August 4, 2013 : 2:00 PM to 3:50 PM
|
Sponsor:
|
Section on Statistical Education
|
Abstract - #308817 |
Title:
|
Asking the Right Questions: Some Help for Referees
|
Author(s):
|
Marijtje van Duijn*+ and Don van Ravenzwaaij
|
Companies:
|
Univ of Groningen and University of New South Wales
|
Keywords:
|
scientific fraud ;
questionable research practice ;
reviewer guidelines
|
Abstract:
|
A critical inspection of the papers by Stapel and his co-authors yielded various degrees of inconsistencies as well as results that were "too good to be true". With the proper training, these incorrect and unlikely results could have been spotted by critical reviewers. The 'mistakes' can be categorized as omissions in the procedural details of the experiment, incorrect descriptive statistics, incorrect test statistics, and unlikely cell means. The latter are inconsistent with the assumption of independent observations and therefore suggest data manipulation, such as deselecting unfavorable outcomes (outliers), adding favorable observations, or making up the complete dataset (see Klaassen, 2013).
This contribution provides a checklist for reviewers that should allow them to verify the correctness (or at least assess the likelihood) of presented results in submitted manuscripts and thus the scientific contribution of the paper under review.
|
Authors who are presenting talks have a * after their name.
Back to the full JSM 2013 program
|
2013 JSM Online Program Home
For information, contact jsm@amstat.org or phone (888) 231-3473.
If you have questions about the Continuing Education program, please contact the Education Department.
The views expressed here are those of the individual authors and not necessarily those of the JSM sponsors, their officers, or their staff.
Copyright © American Statistical Association.