Peter Hayes
@peter-hayes.bsky.social
PhD researcher working at an intersection between quant psych methods/longitudinal modelling/metascience.
- researcher practices
- personality/assessment/individual differences
- child and adolescent development
- Obsidian evangelist
- researcher practices
- personality/assessment/individual differences
- child and adolescent development
- Obsidian evangelist
have you been baking Ben?
June 3, 2025 at 5:11 AM
have you been baking Ben?
it sounds like you want a plan for a '1-page essay', of indeterminate size/length
April 2, 2025 at 9:15 AM
it sounds like you want a plan for a '1-page essay', of indeterminate size/length
Thanks Peter, I'll have to read the chapter and see where you land on how Australians think about the normative aspects of income and wealth distribution. looking forward to it.
March 6, 2025 at 12:19 AM
Thanks Peter, I'll have to read the chapter and see where you land on how Australians think about the normative aspects of income and wealth distribution. looking forward to it.
Thanks Peter, do you think Australia's 'fair go' narrative is fundamentally changing, or are (might) these (be) temporary disruptions?
March 6, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Thanks Peter, do you think Australia's 'fair go' narrative is fundamentally changing, or are (might) these (be) temporary disruptions?
omg, this is so funny. UCD is my alma mater and this has brought me joy. thank you
March 5, 2025 at 11:28 PM
omg, this is so funny. UCD is my alma mater and this has brought me joy. thank you
i like to randomly change between camelCase and snake_case and i'd prefer you not to question me, thank you very much
March 4, 2025 at 9:52 AM
i like to randomly change between camelCase and snake_case and i'd prefer you not to question me, thank you very much
great: resources provided ahead of time enabling people to be properly set up. amazingly detailed resource pack provided so that I could refer to it after the fact.
also great: thoughtful use of discord as the conversation channel alongside google codelab
terrible: reading code off pdfs
also great: thoughtful use of discord as the conversation channel alongside google codelab
terrible: reading code off pdfs
March 4, 2025 at 3:38 AM
great: resources provided ahead of time enabling people to be properly set up. amazingly detailed resource pack provided so that I could refer to it after the fact.
also great: thoughtful use of discord as the conversation channel alongside google codelab
terrible: reading code off pdfs
also great: thoughtful use of discord as the conversation channel alongside google codelab
terrible: reading code off pdfs
Model cough Context cough Protocol
March 4, 2025 at 1:57 AM
Model cough Context cough Protocol
it's almost like the people haven't read "Causal and Associational Language in Observational Health Research: A systematic Evaluation"
March 2, 2025 at 10:07 PM
it's almost like the people haven't read "Causal and Associational Language in Observational Health Research: A systematic Evaluation"
i look forward to people bemoaning the state of this new meta-meta-science and wishing for a return to the simpler days of meta-science.
February 28, 2025 at 6:23 AM
i look forward to people bemoaning the state of this new meta-meta-science and wishing for a return to the simpler days of meta-science.
i'm something of a many-many-analyst-analyst myself
February 28, 2025 at 5:26 AM
i'm something of a many-many-analyst-analyst myself
how many many-analyst studies do we need before we can do meta-science of many-analyst studies?
quick back of the envelope calculations only please
quick back of the envelope calculations only please
February 28, 2025 at 5:26 AM
how many many-analyst studies do we need before we can do meta-science of many-analyst studies?
quick back of the envelope calculations only please
quick back of the envelope calculations only please
this is an interesting argument and one that has implications for the 'just do better science' argument
i think we should think about the many different ways that disciplinary norms shape and constrain science and scientific progress
- could be theory, methods, reporting, data wrangling
i think we should think about the many different ways that disciplinary norms shape and constrain science and scientific progress
- could be theory, methods, reporting, data wrangling
February 28, 2025 at 5:22 AM
this is an interesting argument and one that has implications for the 'just do better science' argument
i think we should think about the many different ways that disciplinary norms shape and constrain science and scientific progress
- could be theory, methods, reporting, data wrangling
i think we should think about the many different ways that disciplinary norms shape and constrain science and scientific progress
- could be theory, methods, reporting, data wrangling
anyway, i better get back to my actual work -
February 28, 2025 at 2:19 AM
anyway, i better get back to my actual work -
it also seems that you can conceive of a scientifically useful contribution from this kind of study
this study provides an empirical test of something we can otherwise only speculate about.
.
this study provides an empirical test of something we can otherwise only speculate about.
.
February 28, 2025 at 2:18 AM
it also seems that you can conceive of a scientifically useful contribution from this kind of study
this study provides an empirical test of something we can otherwise only speculate about.
.
this study provides an empirical test of something we can otherwise only speculate about.
.
I'm not sure how you would even begin to deal with the issue of selection bias by handing this type of study to a select set of subject domain experts.
it seems like there is a cake and eating it problem
it seems like there is a cake and eating it problem
February 28, 2025 at 2:17 AM
I'm not sure how you would even begin to deal with the issue of selection bias by handing this type of study to a select set of subject domain experts.
it seems like there is a cake and eating it problem
it seems like there is a cake and eating it problem
i would counter that it may be useful to develop an understanding of whether there are systematic researcher biases that may cross-cut substantive topics/domains of research and to have information about which researcher decisions have greatest impact on model estimates, etc
February 28, 2025 at 1:59 AM
i would counter that it may be useful to develop an understanding of whether there are systematic researcher biases that may cross-cut substantive topics/domains of research and to have information about which researcher decisions have greatest impact on model estimates, etc
and I guess that's your fundamental argument - that understanding how researcher decisions can contribute to variability in findings doesn't appear to be useful to the scientific endeavour. 1/
February 28, 2025 at 1:57 AM
and I guess that's your fundamental argument - that understanding how researcher decisions can contribute to variability in findings doesn't appear to be useful to the scientific endeavour. 1/
fine, but that doesn't preclude the usefulness of understanding factors that may influence variability in modelling
February 28, 2025 at 1:44 AM
fine, but that doesn't preclude the usefulness of understanding factors that may influence variability in modelling
Even aligning theory to a statistical model is not trivial and may involve variability due to subjective/researcher decisions.
Being able to model those sources of variability is a useful scientific contribution
Being able to model those sources of variability is a useful scientific contribution
February 28, 2025 at 1:28 AM
Even aligning theory to a statistical model is not trivial and may involve variability due to subjective/researcher decisions.
Being able to model those sources of variability is a useful scientific contribution
Being able to model those sources of variability is a useful scientific contribution
It's striking that you speak about the blue-tit claim, but not the grassland claim
What can you say about contexts in which there is no univocal theoretical framework? What can you say when there may be multiple causal mechanisms? /1
What can you say about contexts in which there is no univocal theoretical framework? What can you say when there may be multiple causal mechanisms? /1
February 28, 2025 at 1:27 AM
It's striking that you speak about the blue-tit claim, but not the grassland claim
What can you say about contexts in which there is no univocal theoretical framework? What can you say when there may be multiple causal mechanisms? /1
What can you say about contexts in which there is no univocal theoretical framework? What can you say when there may be multiple causal mechanisms? /1
thanks, I guess I was getting excited about that potential paper. "psychology without its eugenicist foundations."
February 20, 2025 at 12:57 AM
thanks, I guess I was getting excited about that potential paper. "psychology without its eugenicist foundations."
Yeah, so given this looks like an introductory paragraph, I'd be interested in whether the following argument is about how a statistics not based on eugenics might have contributed to a different empirical psychology.
Do you have a view?
Do you have a view?
February 19, 2025 at 11:43 PM
Yeah, so given this looks like an introductory paragraph, I'd be interested in whether the following argument is about how a statistics not based on eugenics might have contributed to a different empirical psychology.
Do you have a view?
Do you have a view?
Is it really secondary to what made them foundational to the field?
Briggs' article on Galton in Historical and Conceptual Foundations supports the view that his commitment to eugenics were pretty essential/core to the statistical methods that he developed
Briggs' article on Galton in Historical and Conceptual Foundations supports the view that his commitment to eugenics were pretty essential/core to the statistical methods that he developed
February 19, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Is it really secondary to what made them foundational to the field?
Briggs' article on Galton in Historical and Conceptual Foundations supports the view that his commitment to eugenics were pretty essential/core to the statistical methods that he developed
Briggs' article on Galton in Historical and Conceptual Foundations supports the view that his commitment to eugenics were pretty essential/core to the statistical methods that he developed