Cargando…
Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed
Rouder and Haaf (2021) propose that studying qualitative individual differences would be a useful tool for researchers. I agree with their central message. I use this commentary to highlight examples from the literature where similar questions have been asked, and how researchers have addressed them...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ubiquity Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8396121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34514319 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.169 |
_version_ | 1783744303273607168 |
---|---|
author | Hedge, Craig |
author_facet | Hedge, Craig |
author_sort | Hedge, Craig |
collection | PubMed |
description | Rouder and Haaf (2021) propose that studying qualitative individual differences would be a useful tool for researchers. I agree with their central message. I use this commentary to highlight examples from the literature where similar questions have been asked, and how researchers have addressed them with existing tools. I also observe that while the hierarchical Bayesian framework is a useful tool for studying individual differences, it does not relieve us of the requirement to evaluate the forms of reliability that are critical to our research questions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8396121 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Ubiquity Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83961212021-09-09 Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed Hedge, Craig J Cogn Commentary Rouder and Haaf (2021) propose that studying qualitative individual differences would be a useful tool for researchers. I agree with their central message. I use this commentary to highlight examples from the literature where similar questions have been asked, and how researchers have addressed them with existing tools. I also observe that while the hierarchical Bayesian framework is a useful tool for studying individual differences, it does not relieve us of the requirement to evaluate the forms of reliability that are critical to our research questions. Ubiquity Press 2021-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8396121/ /pubmed/34514319 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.169 Text en Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Hedge, Craig Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title | Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title_full | Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title_fullStr | Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title_full_unstemmed | Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title_short | Qualitative Individual Differences are Useful, but Reliability Should be Assessed and Not Assumed |
title_sort | qualitative individual differences are useful, but reliability should be assessed and not assumed |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8396121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34514319 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.169 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hedgecraig qualitativeindividualdifferencesareusefulbutreliabilityshouldbeassessedandnotassumed |