dingdingpeng.the100.ci
Personality psych & causal inference @UniLeipzig. I like all things science, beer, & puns. Even better when combined! Part of http://the100.ci, http://openscience-leipzig.org
6,148 posts
9,227 followers
2,278 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Here’s one journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
And here’s a critical commentary (I was very relieved that I didn’t have to write that one myself lol journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...).
I’ve actually used these for teaching as well!
comment in response to
post
It may be the relationship between kilometers and miles, but it’s my unique questionnaire for miles and this one is really different I swear 🥺
comment in response to
post
It was a good pun 😭 I just can’t get over that killingsworth line which provides a justification for never controlling anything
comment in response to
post
I use terms such as “increase” and “gain” for ease of exposition but, to be clear, I am simply describing cross-sectional associations between happiness and Birkenstocks.
comment in response to
post
Recent research actually shows that, if you use a better measure of well-being, it keeps rising linearly with log(Birkenstocks)
comment in response to
post
wait which money am I missing out???
comment in response to
post
It’s just an unfortunate coincidence that my best friend decided that Ding Ding Peng would be a great nickname for me (and subsequently me randomly using that name for twitter)
comment in response to
post
worse 😂
comment in response to
post
We have, for example, a line of literature where the “hidden benefits” of neuroticism for health are revealed once you control for self-reported health 🥲
comment in response to
post
(I’m just realizing this is a pattern, somebody will make a sensible point and my response is essentially “…unless you mess shit up badly, as we do in our field” 🥲)
comment in response to
post
Unless you manage to pull off that psychology stunt where you control for something that is essentially an alternative measure of the outcome to reveal new, counterintuitive findings 🦄
comment in response to
post
I worry a bit the pendulum has swung such that people are excusing themselves from adjusting for plausible confounders by declaring the threat of posttreatment control bias.
Then they show some surprising or contrarian or flashy finding that only holds up if you omit what we used to control for.
comment in response to
post
I think I’ve become black pilled that one writes about these things *so that reviewers are more aware of them*; for authors it’s just too easy to be strategically confused.
comment in response to
post
People have been citing my 2018 causal inference primer for quite some time to justify not adjusting for variables that are perfectly plausible confounders 😭
comment in response to
post
Do you want to nudge people into leaving academia. Because a lot of the stuff I see when reviewing… 🫣
comment in response to
post
Yeah like wtf is going on
comment in response to
post
😂
comment in response to
post
I think that’s it, that must be the final take.
comment in response to
post
Have…have you previously damaged a desk on which you were operating a computer or the like.
comment in response to
post
Yo dawg I heard you like bread
comment in response to
post
Actually once you call it “salad” it’s not longer carbs but instead counts as leafy greens.
comment in response to
post
spending your career pursuing knowledge for its own sake is a deal with the devil: the upside is you get to study whatever you want however you want. the downside is that so does your equally tenured but totally wrong-headed neighbor--and the world, almost by definition, doesn't care either way
comment in response to
post
Do you do a lot of cutting at your desk? This raises so many questions.
comment in response to
post
We realized the “office supplier” sells literally everything (a way for self-employed people to, uhm, reduce their tax burden?) and we have two kids who like crafting…so…
In hindsight one giant cutting mat may have been enough. But it’s a wholesaler when you buy more it gets cheaper 😂
comment in response to
post
I need this…for…my start-up
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately I can’t disagree
comment in response to
post
Then that’s a paddling
comment in response to
post
I find the causal inference background quite helpful for that assessment — we know that certain things cannot work that way, so if somebody claims that wasn’t the case and that they actually DO have a silver bullet…
comment in response to
post
I haven’t, but I know the authors and expect only the best!
comment in response to
post
Our benchmark for that may differ 😂
comment in response to
post
Many thanks 😊
comment in response to
post
Literally a first world measurement problem.
comment in response to
post
😭
comment in response to
post
tbf if they just want to see whether some other model coefficient of interest changes, that would work 😆 like you can fully control for age/period/cohort effects. You...just can't really interpret the coefficients of those controls.
comment in response to
post
Many thanks 😊
comment in response to
post
Per you're not the right person to complain about people slaying hard 😂
comment in response to
post
Article mentions the idea of a placental microbiome which makes me feel decidedly uncomfortable
comment in response to
post
It's my Ikigai
comment in response to
post
I am *so* grateful Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science (AMPPS) exists; it's just the perfect fit for the type of article that I both enjoy writing and consider worthwhile.