Michael C. Frank Profile picture
Jan 20, 2023 13 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Do you want to do a psychology experiment while following best practices in open science? My collaborators and I have created Experimentology, a new open web textbook (to be published by MIT Press but free online forever).

experimentology.io

Some highlights! 🧵
The book is intended for advanced undergrads or grad students, and is designed around the flow of experimental project - from planning through design, execution, and reporting, with open science concepts like reproducibility, data sharing, and preregistration woven throughout. Experiment sketch (population, sample, experimental design,
We start by thinking through what an experiment is, highlighting the role of randomization in making causal claims and introduce DAGs (causal graphs) as a tool for thinking about these. We then discuss how experiments relate to psychological theories.
experimentology.io/1-experiments Graphical model showing confounds being eliminatedNomological network of constructs and causal links between t
We introduce issues of reproducibility, replicability, and robustness and review the meta-science literature on each of these. We also give a treatment of ethical frameworks for human subjects research and the ethical imperative for open science.
experimentology.io/3-replication
In our chapters on statistics, we introduce estimation and inference and both Bayesian and frequentist approaches. Our emphasis is on model-building and data description, rather than on dichotomous p<.05 inference.
experimentology.io/7-models Frequentist and bayesian perspectives on estimation and infe
Next, we move to the meat of the book, with chapters on measurement, design, and sampling. I'm very proud of these chapters because I don't know of any similar treatment of these topics, and they are critical for experimentalists!
experimentology.io/8-measurement Reliability and validity target diagramIllustration of dose-response designs
How do you organize your files for sharing? Should you include manipulation checks? What are best practices for piloting? The next section of the book has chapters on preregistration, data collection, and project management.
experimentology.io/11-prereg Continuum of prespecification of analysis - more discovery f
The final section contains chapters on presenting and interpreting research, including writing, visualization, and meta-analysis.
experimentology.io/14-writing introduction, methods, results, and discussion diagram
Throughout, the book features case studies, "accident reports" (issues in the published literature), code boxes for learning how to reproduce our examples, and boxes highlighting ethical issues that come up during research.
We also have four "tools" appendices, including introductions to RMarkdown, github, the tidyverse, and ggplot.

experimentology.io/A-git
Use Experimentology in your methods course! We include a guide for instructors with sample schedules and projects, and we'd love to get your feedback on how the material works in both undergrad and grad courses.
experimentology.io/E-instructors
Experimentology is still work in progress, and we're releasing it in part to gather feedback on errors, omissions, and ways that we can improve the presentation of complex topics. Please don't hesistate to reach out or to log issues on our issue tracker:

github.com/langcog/experi…
My wonderful co-authors are @mbraginsky, @JulieCachia, @coles_nicholas_, @Tom_Hardwicke, @hawkrobe, Maya Mathur, and Rondeline Williams!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Michael C. Frank

Michael C. Frank Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mcxfrank

Apr 19, 2023
Can a large language model be used as a "cognitive model" - meaning, a scientific artifact that helps us reason about the emergence of complex behavior and abstract representations in the human mind? My answer is YES.

Why and under what conditions? 🧵 Figure showing a computatio...
A scientific model represents part or a whole of a particular system of interest, allowing researchers to explore, probe, and explain specific behaviors of the system. plato.stanford.edu/entries/models…
Cognitive models are instances of this strategy, in which an artifact (typically a set of equations or a program) is used to represent a hypothesized set of mental operations. In practice, this could be anything from economic decisions to language use in context. Parallel between model and ...
Read 18 tweets
Apr 10, 2023
What does it mean for a large language model (LLM) to "have" a particular ability? Developmental psychologists argue about these questions all the time and have for decades. There are some ground rules. 🧵
diagram of developmental change referenced later in the post
diagram of abstractions linking to observations referenced later in the post
This thread builds on my previous thread about general principles for LLM evaluation. Here I want to talk specifically about claims about the presence of a particular ability (or relatedly, an underlying representation or abstraction).
Again, I'm not saying that LLMs do or don't have any particular ability or representation. But I do think it's reasonable to *entertain* these sorts of ideas - just the same way Premack famously asked "does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?" cambridge.org/core/journals/…
Read 16 tweets
Apr 4, 2023
People are testing large language models (LLMs) on their "cognitive" abilities - theory of mind, causality, syllogistic reasoning, etc. Many (most?) of these evaluations are deeply flawed. To evaluate LLMs effectively, we need some principles from experimental psychology.🧵
Just to be clear, in this thread I'm not saying that LLMs do or don't have *any* cognitive capacity. I'm trying to discuss a few basic ground rules for *claims* about whether they do.
Why use ideas from experimental psychology? Well, ChatGPT and other chat LLMs are non-reproducible. Without versioning and random seeds, we have to treat them as "non-human subjects."
Read 16 tweets
Mar 27, 2023
How do we compare the scale of language learning input for large language models vs. humans? I've been trying to come to grips with recent progress in AI. Let me explain these two illustrations I made to help. 🧵 ImageImage
Recent progress in AI is truly astonishing, though somewhat hard to interpret. I don't want to reiterate recent discussion, but @spiantado has a good take in the first part of lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/007180; l like this thoughtful piece by @MelMitchell1 as well: pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…
Many caveats still apply. LLMs are far from perfect, and I am still struggling with their immediate and eventual impacts on science (see linked thread). My goal in the current thread is to think about them as cognitive artifacts instead.
Read 19 tweets
Mar 22, 2023
My lab held a hackathon yesterday to play with places where large language models could help us with our research in cognitive science. The mandate was, "how can these models help us do what we do, but better and faster."

Some impressions:🧵
Whatever their flaws, chat-based LLMs are astonishing. My kids and I used ChatGPT to write birthday poems for their grandma. I would have bet money against this being possible even ten years ago.

But can they be used to improve research in cognitive science and psychology?
1. Using chat-based agents to retrieve factual knowledge is not effective. They are not trained for this and they do it poorly (the "hallucination problem"). Ask ChatGPT for a scientist bio, and the result will be similar but with random swaps of institutions, dates, facts, etc.
Read 15 tweets
Jan 7, 2019
For two years, @mbraginsky, @danyurovsky, Virginia Marchman, and I have been working on a book called "Variability and Consistency in Early Language Learning: The Wordbank Project" (@mitpress).

Here's our draft: langcog.github.io/wordbank-book/…

[+ a thread with a few of our findings]
We look at child language using a big dataset of parent reports of children's vocabulary from wordbank.stanford.edu, w/ 75k kids and 25 languages. (Data are from MacArthur-Bates CDI and variants). Surprisingly, parent report is both reliable and valid! langcog.github.io/wordbank-book/…
First finding: It's long been known that children are variable with respect to language. The striking thing is that the level of variability is very consistent across languages. The world around, toddlers are all over the place with respect to language! langcog.github.io/wordbank-book/…
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(