Search

Your search keyword '"Van Den Bergh, Don"' showing total 8 results
Start Over Author "Van Den Bergh, Don" Topic psychology
8 results on '"Van Den Bergh, Don"'

1. A review of applications of the Bayes factor in psychological research.

Author

Heck DW, Boehm U, Böing-Messing F, Bürkner PC, Derks K, Dienes Z, Fu Q, Gu X, Karimova D, Kiers HAL, Klugkist I, Kuiper RM, Lee MD, Leenders R, Leplaa HJ, Linde M, Ly A, Meijerink-Bosman M, Moerbeek M, Mulder J, Palfi B, Schönbrodt FD, Tendeiro JN, van den Bergh D, Van Lissa CJ, van Ravenzwaaij D, Vanpaemel W, Wagenmakers EJ, Williams DR, Zondervan-Zwijnenburg M, and Hoijtink H

Subjects
Humans, Software, Research Design, Bayes Theorem, Behavioral Research methods, Psychology methods
Abstract

The last 25 years have shown a steady increase in attention for the Bayes factor as a tool for hypothesis evaluation and model selection. The present review highlights the potential of the Bayes factor in psychological research. We discuss six types of applications: Bayesian evaluation of point null, interval, and informative hypotheses, Bayesian evidence synthesis, Bayesian variable selection and model averaging, and Bayesian evaluation of cognitive models. We elaborate what each application entails, give illustrative examples, and provide an overview of key references and software with links to other applications. The article is concluded with a discussion of the opportunities and pitfalls of Bayes factor applications and a sketch of corresponding future research lines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results.

Author

Landy JF, Jia ML, Ding IL, Viganola D, Tierney W, Dreber A, Johannesson M, Pfeiffer T, Ebersole CR, Gronau QF, Ly A, van den Bergh D, Marsman M, Derks K, Wagenmakers EJ, Proctor A, Bartels DM, Bauman CW, Brady WJ, Cheung F, Cimpian A, Dohle S, Donnellan MB, Hahn A, Hall MP, Jiménez-Leal W, Johnson DJ, Lucas RE, Monin B, Montealegre A, Mullen E, Pang J, Ray J, Reinero DA, Reynolds J, Sowden W, Storage D, Su R, Tworek CM, Van Bavel JJ, Walco D, Wills J, Xu X, Yam KC, Yang X, Cunningham WA, Schweinsberg M, Urwitz M, The Crowdsourcing Hypothesis Tests Collaboration, and Uhlmann EL

Subjects
Adult, Humans, Random Allocation, Crowdsourcing, Psychology methods, Research Design
Abstract

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer five original research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from 2 separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete 1 version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: Materials from different teams rendered statistically significant effects in opposite directions for 4 of 5 hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to + 0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for 2 hypotheses and a lack of support for 3 hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, whereas considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP.

Author

Wagenmakers EJ, Love J, Marsman M, Jamil T, Ly A, Verhagen J, Selker R, Gronau QF, Dropmann D, Boutin B, Meerhoff F, Knight P, Raj A, van Kesteren EJ, van Doorn J, Šmíra M, Epskamp S, Etz A, Matzke D, de Jong T, van den Bergh D, Sarafoglou A, Steingroever H, Derks K, Rouder JN, and Morey RD

Subjects
Humans, Research Design, Bayes Theorem, Psychology, Software
Abstract

Bayesian hypothesis testing presents an attractive alternative to p value hypothesis testing. Part I of this series outlined several advantages of Bayesian hypothesis testing, including the ability to quantify evidence and the ability to monitor and update this evidence as data come in, without the need to know the intention with which the data were collected. Despite these and other practical advantages, Bayesian hypothesis tests are still reported relatively rarely. An important impediment to the widespread adoption of Bayesian tests is arguably the lack of user-friendly software for the run-of-the-mill statistical problems that confront psychologists for the analysis of almost every experiment: the t-test, ANOVA, correlation, regression, and contingency tables. In Part II of this series we introduce JASP ( http://www.jasp-stats.org ), an open-source, cross-platform, user-friendly graphical software package that allows users to carry out Bayesian hypothesis tests for standard statistical problems. JASP is based in part on the Bayesian analyses implemented in Morey and Rouder's BayesFactor package for R. Armed with JASP, the practical advantages of Bayesian hypothesis testing are only a mouse click away.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. How Prior Information from National Assessments can be used when Designing Experimental Studies without a Control Group

Author

Van den Bergh, Don, Vandermeulen, Nina, Lesterhuis, Marije, De Maeyer, Sven, Van Steendam, Elke, Rijlaarsdam, Gert, Van den Bergh, Huub, Psychologische Methodenleer (Psychologie, FMG), and Domain specific Learning (RICDE, FMG)

Subjects
Educational sciences, Baseline comparison, General Language Studies and Linguistics, Linguistics and Language, Jämförande språkvetenskap och allmän lingvistik, Literature and Literary Theory, Bayesian inference, Psychology, Linguistics, Prior information, Language and Linguistics, Education
Abstract

National assessments yield a description of the proficiency level in a domain while accounting for differences between tasks. For instance, in writing assessments the level of proficiency is typically evaluated with a variety of topics and multiple tasks. This enables generalizations from specific tasks to a domain. In (quasi-)experimental research, however, writing skills are often evaluated with a single task. Yet, conclusions about the effectiveness of the treatment are formulated on the level of the domain, which is, euphemistically put, quite a stretch. Although conclusions drawn about the effect of the treatment are specific to the task administered, they are often generalized to the domain without any form of reservation. This raises the question whether we can use the results of national assessments about differences between tasks in the analyses of experimental studies. In this paper, we demonstrate how the information of a baseline data set can be used as a kind of control condition in the analysis of an experimental study. ispartof: Journal of Writing Research vol:14 issue:3 pages:447-469 status: published

Published
2023

5. Reproducibility Project: Psychology

Author

Anderson, Christopher, Anderson, Joanna, van Assen, Marcel, Attridge, Peter, Attwood, Angela, Axt, Jordan, Babel, Molly, Bahník, Štěpán, Baranski, Erica, Barnett-Cowan, Michael, Bartmess, Elizabeth, Beer, Jennifer, Bell, Raoul, Bentley, Heather, van den Bergh, Don, Beyan, Leah, den Bezemer, Bobby, Borsboom, Denny, Bosch, Annick, Bosco, Frank, Bowman, Sara, Brandt, Mark, Braswell, Erin, Brohmer, Hilmar, Brown, Benjamin, Brown, Kristina, Brüning, Jovita, Calhoun-Sauls, Ann, Callahan, Shannon, Chagnon, Elizabeth, Chandler, Jesse, Chartier, Christopher, Cheung, Felix, Chu, Phuonguyen, Cillessen, Linda, Clay, Russ, Cleary, Hayley, Cloud, Mark, Cohn, Michael, Cohoon, Johanna, Columbus, Simon, Costantini, Giulio, Cramblet Alvarez, Leslie, Cremata, Edward, Crusius, Jan, DeCoster, Jamie, DeGaetano, Michelle, Della Penna, Nicolás, Deserno, Marie, Devitt, Olivia, Dewitte, Laura, DiGiacomo, Philip, Dobolyi, David, Dodson, Geneva, Donnellan, Brent, Donohue, Ryan, van Dooren, Roel, van Doorn, Johnny, Dore, Rebecca, Dorrough, Angela, Dorsthorst, Anniek, Dreber, Anna, Dugas, Michelle, Dunn, Elizabeth, Easey, Kayleigh, Eboigbe, Sylvia, Eggleston, Casey, Embley, Jo, Epskamp, Sacha, Errington, Timothy, Estel, Vivien, Farach, Frank, Feather, Jenelle, Fedor, Anna, Fernández, Belén, Fiedler, Susann, Field, James, Fitneva, Stanka, Flagan, Taru, Forest, Amanda, Forsell, Eskil, Foster, Joshua, Frank, Michael, Frazier, Rebecca, Fuchs, Heather, Gable, Philip, Galak, Jeff, Galliani, Elisa, Gampa, Anup, Garcia, Sara, Gazarian, Douglas, Gilbert, Elizabeth, Giner-Sorolla, Roger, Glöckner, Andreas, Goellner, Lars, Goh, Jin, Goldberg, Rebecca, Goldinger, Stephen, Goodbourn, Patrick, Gordon-McKeon, Shauna, Gorges, Bryan, Gorges, Jessie, Goss, Justin, Graham, Jesse, Gray, Jeremy, Hartgerink, Chris, Hasselman, Fred, Hayes, Timothy, Heikensten, Emma, Henninger, Felix, Hicks, Grace, Hodsoll, John, Holubar, Taylor, Hoogendoorn, Geertje, van der Hulst, Marije, Humphries, Denise, Hung, Cathy, Immelman, Nathali, Irsik, Vanessa, Jahn, Georg, Jäkel, Frank, Jekel, Marc, Johannesson, Magnus, Johnson, David, Johnson-Grey, Kate, Johnson, Larissa, Johnston, William, Jonas, Kai, Joy-Gaba, Jennifer, Kappes, Heather, Kelso, Kim, Kidwell, Mallory, Kim, Seung, Kirkhart, Matthew, Kleinberg, Bennett, Knezevic, Goran, Kolorz, Franziska, Krause, Robert, Krijnen, Job, Kuhlmann, Tim, Kunkels, Yoram, Kyc, Megan, Lai, Calvin, Laique, Aamir, Lakens, Daniel, Lane, Kristin, Lassetter, Bethany, Lazarevic, Ljiljana, LeBel, Etienne, Lee, Key Jung, Lee, Minha, Lemm, Kristi, Levitan, Carmel, Lewis, Melissa, Lin, Lin, Lin, Stephanie, Lippold, Matthias, Loureiro, Darren, Lumian, Daniel, Luteijn, Ilse, Mackinnon, Sean, Mainard, Heather, Marigold, Denise, Martin, Daniel, Martinez, Tylar, Masicampo, E.J., Matacotta, Joshua, Mathur, Maya, May, Michael, McRae, Kateri, McElroy, Todd, Mechin, Nicole, Mehta, Pranjal, Meixner, Johannes, Melinger, Alissa, Miller, Jeremy, Smith, Mallorie, Moore, Katherine, Möschl, Marcus, Motyl, Matt, Müller, Stephanie, Munafo, Marcus, Muñoz, Alisa, Neijenhuijs, Koen, Nervi, Taylor, Nicolas, Gandalf, Nilsonne, Gustav, Nosek, Brian, Olsson, Catherine, Osborne, Colleen, Ostkamp, Lutz, Pavel, Misha, Perna, Olivia, Pernet, Cyril, Perugini, Marco, Pipitone, R. Nathan, Pitts, Michael, Plessow, Franziska, Prenoveau, Jason, Ratliff, Kate, Reinhard, David, Renkewitz, Frank, van Renswoude, Daan, Ricker, Ashley, Rigney, Anastasia, van Rijn, Hedderik, Rivers, Andrew, Roebke, Mark, Rutchick, Abraham, Ryan, Robert, Sahin, Onur, Saide, Anondah, Sandstrom, Gillian, Santos, David, Saxe, Rebecca, Schlegelmilch, René, Schmidt, Kathleen, Scholz, Sabine, Seibel, Larissa, Selterman, Dylan, Shaki, Samuel, Simpson, William, Sinclair, H., Skorinko, Jeanine, Slowik, Agnieszka, Snyder, Joel, Soderberg, Courtney, Sonnleitner, Carina, Spencer, Nicholas, Spies, Jeffrey, Staples, Angela, steegen, sara, Steinberg, Mia, Stieger, Stefan, Strohminger, Nina, Sullivan, Gavin, Talhelm, Thomas, Tapia, Megan, Thomae, Manuela, Toton, Sarah, Tibboel, Helen, Tio, Pia, Traets, Frits, Tsang, Steve, tuerlinckx, francis, Tullett, Alexa, Turchan, Paul, vanpaemel, wolf, Vásquez-Echeverría, Alejandro, van 't Veer, Anna, Vélez, Natalia, van de Ven, Mathijs, Vermue, Marieke, Verschoor, Mark, Vianello, Michelangelo, Voracek, Martin, Vuu, Gina, Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, Weerdmeester, Johanna, Welsh, Ashlee, Westgate, Erin, Wissink, Joeri, Wood, Michael, Andy, Wright, Emily, Wu, Sining, Zeelenberg, Marcel, Zuni, Kellylynn, Hartshorne, Joshua, and Grange, James

Subjects
reproduction, metascience, replication, psychological science, open science, psychology, crowdsource, reproducibility
Abstract

Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. Parsimonious Estimation of Signal Detection Models from Confidence Ratings

Author

Selker, Ravi, van den Bergh, Don, Criss, Amy, and Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan

Subjects
FOS: Psychology, Psychology, Quantitative Psychology, Social and Behavioral Sciences
Abstract

Signal Detection Theory (SDT) is used to quantify people’s ability and biasin discriminating stimuli. The ability to detect a stimulus is often measuredthrough confidence ratings. In SDT models, the use of confidence ratingsnecessitates the estimation of confidence category thresholds, a requirementthat can easily result in models that are overly complex. As a parsimoniousalternative, we propose a threshold SDT model that estimates these categorythresholds using only two parameters. We fit the model to data from Pratte,Rouder, and Morey (2010) and illustrate its benefits over previous thresholdSDT models.

Published
2018

7. Suggestions to Advance Your Mission: An Open Letter to Dr. Shinobu Kitayama, Editor of JPSP:ASC

Author

Tullett , Alexa, Tullett, Alexa, Urry , Heather, Van Beest , Ilja, Rime , Bernard, Doosje, Bertjan, Dijksterhuis, Ap, Inbar , Yoel, Mccullough, Michael, Dunn, Elizabeth, Milyavskaya , Marina, Gervais , Will, Vazire , Simine, Freitas, Antonio, Harris, Christine, Van Der Maas, Han, Borsboom , Denny, Cesario , Joseph, Jonas , Kai, Inzlicht , Michael, Giner-Sorolla , Roger, Fischer , Agneta, De Ruiter, Jan, Pashler, Harold, Chambers , Christopher, Van Den Bergh , Don, Marsman, Maarten, Wagenmakers , Eric-Jan, Pashler , Harold, Mccullough , Michael, Dunn , Elizabeth, and Freitas , Antonio

Subjects
PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Intragroup Processes, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Social Cognition, Social Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Politics, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Personality and Creativity, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Individual Differences, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Nonverbal Behavior, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Theories of Personality, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Interventions, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Narrative Research, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Diversity, Social and Behavioral Sciences, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Genetic factors, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Moral Behavior, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Interpersonal Relationships, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Personality and Situations, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Personality Processes, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Impression Formation, Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Testing and Assessment, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Violence and Aggression, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Disability, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Self-regulation, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Achievement and Status, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Motivational Behavior, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Prejudice and Discrimination, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Prosocial Behavior, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Well-being, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Social Influence, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Affect and Emotion Regulation, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Self-esteem, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Social Well-being, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Intergroup Processes, FOS: Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Sexuality, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Cultural Differences, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Trait Theory, bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences, bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Social Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Self and Social Identity, bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology|Personality and Social Contexts, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Religion and Spirituality, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Social and Personality Psychology|Attitudes and Persuasion
Abstract

We outline an array of journal policies that JPSP:ASC could adopt to further promote transparent and responsible research practices; in turn, these practices will increase the reliability of research findings published in JPSP:ASC.

Published
2017

8. Quantifying Support for the Null Hypothesis in Psychology: An Empirical Investigation

Author

Aczel, Balazs, Palfi, Bence, Szollosi, Aba, Kovacs, Marton, Szaszi, Barnabas, Szecsi, Peter, Zrubka, Mark, Gronau, Quentin, van den Bergh, Don, Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, and Psychologische Methodenleer (Psychologie, FMG)

Subjects
bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology, 05 social sciences, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Cultural Psychology, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 050105 experimental psychology, FOS: Psychology, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences, 03 medical and health sciences, Open data, 0302 clinical medicine, PsyArXiv|Social and Behavioral Sciences|Psychology, other, bepress|Social and Behavioral Sciences, Psychology, 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences, Null hypothesis, 030217 neurology & neurosurgery, General Psychology, Cognitive psychology
Abstract

In the traditional statistical framework, nonsignificant results leave researchers in a state of suspended disbelief. In this study, we examined, empirically, the treatment and evidential impact of nonsignificant results. Our specific goals were twofold: to explore how psychologists interpret and communicate nonsignificant results and to assess how much these results constitute evidence in favor of the null hypothesis. First, we examined all nonsignificant findings mentioned in the abstracts of the 2015 volumes of Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, and Psychological Science ( N = 137). In 72% of these cases, nonsignificant results were misinterpreted, in that the authors inferred that the effect was absent. Second, a Bayes factor reanalysis revealed that fewer than 5% of the nonsignificant findings provided strong evidence (i.e., BF01 > 10) in favor of the null hypothesis over the alternative hypothesis. We recommend that researchers expand their statistical tool kit in order to correctly interpret nonsignificant results and to be able to evaluate the evidence for and against the null hypothesis.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results