Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Sat, 12 Dec 1992 11:50:00 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Monika Trzcinska <054470@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: let's hear some opinions
              11 Dec 1992 15:27:47 -0800 from <tbn@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU>

On Fri, 11 Dec 1992 15:27:47 -0800 Tor Neilands said:
>
>What does it mean to say "looking at the data the way it is". My
>understanding of the hypothesis testing framework is that as sample size
>increases, so does the statistical power to reject the null hypothesis.
>Thus, as your N increases, you actually will obtain better parameter
>estimates of population parameters. In this sense, then, if you are
>interested in estimating the "true" population values of parameters, you
>wish to have as large a sample as possible--the larger the sample, the more
>accurate your parameter estimates should be.
>Practical significance and statistical significance are not the same concepts.

Tor, obviously our appraches to research are very different.  I agree that
statistical analyses are essential, however, thay are not EXCLUSIVELY
essential.  If I am testing a behavioural adaptation of a refractory period
technique, I can just LOOK at the graph in order to determine what this
refractory period is.  Let is say, that the asymptote of a curve should
theoretically reach 1.0, however, after testing several animals I realize
that most of the asymptotes span between 0.4-0.8.  Obviously they are smaller
than 1.0.  Should I run the analysis to determine whether they are
statistically different from 1.0?  That is not the point.  If I were to do
that I would completely miss the boat on what the graph represents.  Such
values lead us to believe that there might be some inhibitory neural
mechanisms preventing the curves from appraching 1.0.  Although, this might not
be the best example, it shows that not all research is about stats and
significance levels.  I am convinced that if I were to run the analysis I
would find that 0.4 is statistically different from 1.0, but that information
would be completely USELESS, because it ISN'T MEANINGFUL!  I believe that by
blindly relying on statistics instead of looking at what the data may be
telling us, we often miss the essential.

>That's great. I'm very happy for her. Did she have an advisor? Did she have
>a dissertation committee who provided suggestions to her about what she
>should do during her preliminary orals? Did she talk to friends and/or
>colleagues about her research designs? Did she include an introduction in
>her dissertation write-up? Did that introduction cite previous literature
>on which her own work is in part based? Did her advisor guide her or work
>with her in any way?

Tor, she did all this and more.  Her supervisor, which is also my supervisor,
is excellent in her apprach with students, in a sense that she enables us
to conduct OUR, INDEPENDENT RESEARCH (after all isn't getting a Ph.D about
thinking for yourself and solving problems with your own experience,
knowledge and intuition?) with conjunction of occasional, sometimes weekly,
sometimes biweekly meetings.  Her office is beside ours, and we can always pop
in for a question, however, we know more about our research than she does,
and since she has 4 of us, we need to bring her up on the newest stuff,
because she simply forgets what each one of us is doing.  My collegue
did not consult her commitee before she defended, except for submitting
her proposal a year before (when she had already most of her data collected).
She often discussed with us (especially with me, because our research interests
overlap) her data and the interpretations of it.  Of course, she
included an introduction and summary of litterature on which her research
was based!  How could she call it a PH.D disseration if she did not?!
Your question is rather surprising, but maybe I missunderstood your
intentions.  Our supervisor did not guide her work.  They both designed
an experiment, but my collegue was responsible for comming up with
practical and theortical solutions when things did not work out (everyone
reaches a "dead point" in their research at one time or another).
The greatest advantage of working with our supervisor is that she is a
perfectionist when it comes to writing, the final written products
comming our of our lab are always very well received by the community.

>I hope to receive my doctorate in may. When I receive it, I'll be happy and
>proud that while I did a lot of work on this project and put a tremendous
>amount of effort into it for the past three years, I haven't gone at it
>alone--I've learned the value of teamwork and give and take with my advisor
>and my committee members; through gleaning suggestions from them my
>proposal became *much* stronger as a result of their input and criticism. I
>also learned the value of educating and working with enthusiastic,
>motivated undergraduates who very much wanted to take advantage of the
>opportunity to do research with me and my advisor. In fact, I had so many
>applicants for the position that I had to turn away more applicants than I
>could accept. And, on a purely pragmatic level, many grad schools require
>that their undergrad applicants have some type of research experience under
>their belts. By providing the undergrads with an opportunity to work with
>us, they not only get that necessary pragmatic credential, they also get to
>"try out" psychological research and see if they like it--and that's an
>important service we can provide to the undergraduate population of
>psychology majors.

Tor, Best of luck, I hope everything goes well for you and in May you will
be able to call yourself Dr.Tor...!
I also learned value of team work, since I share office and lab space with
4 other lab mates, however, I would never trust them with my own research
because I am the one who knows best how it ticks.
I also believe that it is important for the undergrads to
gain some real research experience, I would just prefer that they do it
with their own data , in a form of a research assistantship, honours thesis or
the like...(at least that is what worked for me).


                                 _
    ) (    Monika Trzcinska    _- o   ) (   054470@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA
   )   (----------------------- o o  )   (----------------------------
    ) (                        -_ o   ) (
                                 -
   "The most important attitude that can be formed is that of a desire
    to go on learning".
                                                  Dewey (1938)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU