Cloudfindings

The Problem With Correcting for Multiple Comparisons It has been widely considered within the scientific community that the threshold for statistical significance of a value depends on the amount of comparisons being calculated in a dataset. The most popular way to correct for multiple comparisons is the Bonferroni correction, in which the threshold for statistical significance of each comparison is divided by the amount of comparisons being (e.g., the common threshold for statistical significance is p=0.05, but if making 5 comparisons, each value would have to be significant at p=0.01 or less for it to be considered significant at the original threshold). However, correcting for multiple comparisons is problematic, which I will demonstrate. Imagine a study were conducted that calculated the correlation between two 1000 item scales, in a sample size of 100, where the correlation was computed to be 0.35. The p value would far surpass the threshold for statistical significance, at a p va

A Novel Way to Measure Theory of Mind: Endorsing Beliefs About Individual Differences in Agreement With Empirical Findings Predicts Self Reported Cognitive Empathy, Autism, and Schizotypy, and Separates Cognitive Empathy from Social Skill & Motivation Conway et al. (2020) reported that performance on a task reflecting how well individuals understand how different people would act and think based on their personality indicates theory of mind and intelligence. If this is the case, then assuming they are accurate, generalized beliefs about individual differences reflecting statistical findings should be associated with theory of mind as well. People who are interested in psychology tend to have higher levels of cognitive empathy (Svedholm-Häkkinen & Lindeman 2015), and it would be expected that people high in cognitive empathy would be better at generating accurate hypotheses about people's minds and would have a higher drive to create such hypotheses, just as those high in sy