'I've been studying statistics for nearly 40 years and I still don't understand it. The ease with which non-statisticians master it is staggering' ~ Stephen John Senn (a statistician)
Ha! That's not really my point here. The point is to have humility, regardless of your level of expertise, especially if you're making decisions about other people's training.
“I forget what I know…because I’m always facing what I don’t know” - Fife This should be framed in the office of every true academic and teacher :) wise words indeed!
As someone who aspires to attend a grad program for a PhD in clinical psychology focused on research, your videos are enormously helpful, and I have looked into many different sources on statistics. I would like to say a big thanks for everything you've put out; I have a journal of notes for your videos. Doing statistics well seems to be very difficult, but I am a lot closer because of the information you've put out. The entertainment value is appreciated as well. Your dedication to free and accessible education (especially for a field as complex to get right as statistics) is quite admirable. Others usually don't question my understanding of psychology, but when they do it is sometimes for good reason as psychology is complex, and I don't understand some concepts as well as I would like to yet. Concerning disagreements, I've found that spending some free time on social psychology, especially attitudes, persuasion, and communication, help me better communicate ideas to others. In addition, I approach the information not with the intent to manipulate but with the intent to properly and fairly explain my reasoning such that if I am incorrect it is easier for others to help me see it. While I do not understand the field enough to give advice up to my standards, researching it has improved my ability to articulate myself considerably. I do understand some subjects on a relatively advanced level, and if I anticipate my audience, and really think about my case beforehand, I can typically articulate it in a way such that, if I do seem to be correct, then others agree. Good luck with this stuff. Your annoyance at the other professors is very fair, but I expect the other professor has at least some good intentions and can be reasoned with (I expect you already understand this of course). Also, sometimes when I write something out or talk it out with another person, I solve what I was unable to solve talking with myself even if the other person didn't contribute much to the conversation. That could be a reason why you made a video on it. Seeing problems in the field like this is probably better for people to think about than not, so I appreciate there being a video anyways.
Thanks for the input. Despite what it seems, I am not a dogmatic opinionated person. I also believe she has good intentions and she has solid reasons for doing what she's doing. Unfortunately, she's unable to see past her own opinions to see the value in what I'm offering. She's left no room for compromise. Oh well.
I'll try to be brief. Mediocrity in all fields is lauded, and even encouraged and applauded so as to be more "inclusive". Intellectual rigor is frowned upon in many industries, and "good enough" has literally become a new buzz expression. I'll share that I've been in the field of Biostatistics for over 40 years, but I'm untrained, and I consider myself mediocre and I actually feel very uneasy and uncomfortable when people say that I'm pretty good in Biostatistics. There's no comparison between devoted, dedicated learning and scholarship, and someone who learned just by doing things over and over again. A brilliant surgeon once told me "anybody can perform surgery, but you need someone who's trained when things go wrong." Imagine trusting someone who taught himself or herself to fly a plane, or build a bridge? Would folks knowingly fly in that plane or drive across that bridge? Same deal with scholarship and expertise and academic excellence except that death isn't the outcome. Like martial arts, one has to dedicate one's life to practice and training to become a master, but those new to martial arts want to fly in the sky and perform acrobatics as if in a circus. Suffice it to say that you're not just gifted in Statistics, but in pedagogy also, and you have mastered your area of expertise to such a great extent that you are able to take exceedingly difficult subjects, and convey them so lay-persons, such as myself and, can easily digest. And that my friend is your rare and uncommon gift. BAM! Excuse typos...
I love that analogy! I will say though that you shouldn't discount your own abilities. I am self-taught in R and that was a long-standing source of insecurity. I don't remember what made me realize I really was an expert, but I started to see my self-taught-ness as a strength, not a weakness. (Especially when I started to "accidentally" discover best-practices that I would have learned from an actual class).
@@QuantPsych Thanks for your sincere words of encouragement. Professors such as yourself are a rare find these days. The notion of "Teaching being a Noble Profession", like Medicine, has been lost. Fortunately in your case, your Pop successfully passed on the baton to his worthy and capable son. BAM!
Expert is thrown around in every subject in my company. It’s embarrassing I think clients love it. Humility is the key. Awesome post Justin. Everyday is a school day…. Love your work.
Hello Dr. Fife, first of all, your channel has taught me a lot. I think I have seen 60% of your videos so far (yes, including the old ones where you had different "guests" and all). As your student-even though you don't know who I am- I stopped liking hypothesis testing, to name something very basic we both have in common. But I didn't stop liking hypothesis testing because you are an expert. And even though I have seen your CV, I believe you are right because you have good arguments for it. I think it is problematic that your main argument with this person at the stats department is that you are more "an expert" than her. That's not a productive discussion in my view. I am a dentist, and when I was studying, many of my teachers were making mistakes that they wanted me to do, based on the fact they were the experts. I think you are right in your argumentation, but not based on yourself, or who you are, or what you studied. You are right because your arguments have a good basis. Anyway, the Berlin Wall fell also because of institutions: the Stasi being overwhelmed, Solidarity in Poland, NATO pressure, the West German government, groups like Neues Forum, the Lutheran church, the SED-Socialist Unity Party. What I want to say is, there are fights that are appropriate for a man, there are fights that are appropriate for institutions, and there are others that require more than even that. Greetings from Chile
Do not give up! You are making a difference. Maybe you do not see it, but your material and publications are helping me to understand what is going wrong with stats in microbiology and infection biology. I am including your view on data for my medical students and in my lab. I am trying, too! I feel you, and I am fighting the old system, too. Hold on! We will manage!😊. P.S.: how possible is for you to move the "office hours" to 2 hours ahead? I am on Europe and your current time will make me a very grumpy and tired PI. 😂
Ha! I'm totally open to that. Let me contact the other students and see if they're willing to bump it ahead. If not, I'm certainly open to that in the future.
I am a data analyst and bioinformatician in microbial ecology, I use R every day but I am not a statistician. I am teaching stats for bio this semester for the first time and the course was structure the same way as a similar level course I took 30 years ago… And, by the way, I love your content and I hope you keep doing more videos. It helps me as many others!
Your videos have been added as optional content for our Psych Honours program. I ❤ your work, and I think you have found your purpose. Please keep keeping-on! You will beside me as I undertake my Psych PhD.
That's a great thing about being a programmer. Nobody thinks they're an expert until they're really really good. Whenever you start to think, "I'm an expert programmer." You realize you have no idea how you would go about programming something like a spreadsheet.
Most challenging class in stats was math. stats in my case. It took me almost 2 yrs to really understand the math. stats. Today I love it to read about math stats contents and proofs. If you really like stats you have to spend time and resources to do research and studies, which the most people do not do.
Hi Professor Fife, I wanted to quickly thank you! I was able to grab your Introduction to Simplistics course on sale, and I’m excited to get started. As I head into my psychology honours year, I’m ready to build on the brilliance of the past while challenging what can be improved. We’re in this fight with you, and your course will be key in that journey. Looking forward to putting it all to good use! Best, Ashley Brisbane, Australia
This one resonated so hard with me. Take comfort in knowing that it's not just you. I study work for a living. Nothing irks me more than econ PhDs who, almost universally, study the economy narrowly (due to the narrowing of the field). They aren't experts on work, organizations, business, incentives, motivation, productivity...and yet they presume to know so much about these things and tend to have a LOT of influence because of their credentials. Specifically, when non-economists hear _economics_ they think _indecipherable math_ and turn off their critical thinking skills. Not all economists are equal. Most new PhDs are at peak Dunning-Kruger, while others think their narrow expertise generalizes far beyond their training. And re neuroscience specifically, there are the Andrew Huberman types. No comment. Anyway, you're not alone.
I immediately doubt the expertise of anyone that looks puzzled if I mention "sigma algebras" or "pullback measure". I mean, can you really call yourself a statistician is you don't know what a Radon measure is? ;)
Definitely NOT gatekeeping. Her saying that she is an expert because she teaches intro stats is like a highschool AP calculus teacher claiming they are an expert in mathematics. Its INSANE. Don't worry! The students who are eager to learn will have your back!
I'm definitely not an expert in statistics. I'm just an applied data scientist. The thing that blew my mind during my master's degree, was when a statistician (meteorologist) showed as multiple papers as a case study on econometrics. It took two weeks as there were a lot of papers. He wanted to showcase HOW MANY GRAVE MISTAKES were made by all sorts of prestigious -nonetheless- people, particularly on regression analysis. At first the whole class was skeptical. After the first lecture it was really interesting for everyone. I didn't have an idea by then how bad this thing is. It goes without saying that all those papers were reviewed and were published by the best of the best journals. This grounded me hard and it was one of the most humiliating experiences I had. And I'm thankful for that because I thought I was really good at these stuff.
Pascal said it first... “The world is a good judge of things, for it is in natural ignorance, which is man's true state. The sciences have two extremes which meet. The first is the pure natural ignorance in which all men find themselves at birth. The other extreme is that reached by great intellects, who, having run through all that men can know, find they know nothing, and come back again to that same ignorance from which they set out; but this is a learned ignorance which is conscious of itself. Those between the two, who have departed from natural ignorance and not been able to reach the other, have some smattering of this vain knowledge and pretend to be wise. These trouble the world and are bad judges of everything. The people and the wise constitute the world; these despise it, and are despised. They judge badly of everything, and the world judges rightly of them.” btw, I am a neuroscientist who teaches intro stats and I am aware of knowing squats when it comes to stats ;) (but I love the subject and passionate about teaching it)
So funny you mention derivatives wrt eigenvalue. Just had to learn some of it for the real part of a complex eigenvalue this summer for application in my own PhD (in stats) research. Well… I FULLY agree, after quite some years studying stats and digging myself more and more into research, intro stat curriculum makes no sense. Everything feels taken out of a magic box without the fundamentals. This is my first interaction with your content, I’ll check your stats teaching directions, now that I’m also curious about the topic.
I heard one paper make the argument that the way we teach statistics is like teaching surgeons to perform operations without them knowing biology. It's ridiculous!
This is an interesting video. As a recent PhD in a subfield of epidemiology studying methodology, I can relate to this, and yet I often get people who say: "You're an epidemiologist, not a statistician..." - I'd be interested in your Part II of this rant where you discuss Quant Psych vs. Econometricians vs. Epidemiologists vs. 'Statisticians' etc.
60 credit hours in STATs and I am still humble to know there’s too much crap to remember. Also, too much mathematical derivations and the mathematical techniques to remember.
I recently attended a seminar of 4th year psych students presenting their thesis work, without the discussion bit they are still working on atm. One project was discussing data scraping and the teaching staff seemed really excited by the findings - from Reddit - and the prospect of running similar studies and getting those published. My concern is that on social media there is nothing preventing bots and AI from posing as humans, or humans to just write whatever narrative they find fun to put out instead of being, or at least trying to be honest. If this is a new direction of research I am concerned
During engineering school, I mentioned I took 'statics' (introductory branch of mechanics/physics) and soooo many people pipe up. I've also taken statistics....... 😂
I think something that helps get across just how much expertise even just a grad student has over an individual who doesn't have the expertise. Just getting a PhD in a specific field gives in excess of like 10000 hours on that ONE subject ALONE, and that is also high level experience rather than just learning the nuts and bolts of the subject. Assuming this other professor who was claiming to be an expert because they had taught this intro statistics course for like 10 years is not going to come close to even the level of hours of practice a PhD student in statistics would get in the subject, not to mention the experience they get after grad school researching and publishing. Obviously, the professor is going to have some understanding of statistics, especially to be able to conduct their own analyses, but it's not even going to be near the amount of time an individual who has gotten their PhD in statistics or statistics related field has spent studying the subject of statistics alone.
Love this! I remember on one project, I wasn't getting the answers I expected. So I ended up rewriting the algorithm to perform a factor analysis. I eventually figured out what my problem was and in the process was like, "oh...I get factor analysis now!" That's the sort of experience you don't get if you're just teaching stats.
Great video. I always thought that every academic journal publisher should employ a statistician to check over every paper before going to reviewers. It would improve science by a million percent.. but perhaps there are just not enough good statistician's out there.
I'm a medical doctor. Dunning-Kreuger effect is rampant in medical interations. Really your mother's friend's cousin is a nurse's aid and she says I should treated your pyelonephritis with cranberry juice? Sure, I'll hold the ICU bed ready for you. Seriously, though, it's a matter of trust - people will trust their mother's friend's cousin because their connection, however thin, is thicker than it is to the stranger in the white coat. Similarly, they will trust their passing familiarity with stats moreso than the funny guy in the gray polo.
As someone who is knew to this (just started PhD), I have to say I am optimisitc that there will be changes for the better. Obviously this won't happen overnight. My PhD is a meta-resarch project on inapproatiate methods in medical statistics, research waste and common statistical problems. We're out here in teams working on this!
@@QuantPsych Have a search up of AIMOS (Association for interdisiplinary meta-research and open science). I am loosly connected and is a great community for this stuff! We have a conference in Australia at the end of this year (yearly).
I know exactly what you mean. We also should renew our statistics classes, but nobody is willing to, even the new stats prof is relying on the oldschool literature and way of teaching it :D But dealing with p-values is possible as long as you really ponder on how to interpret them (not on how not to interpret them, because students seem to remember the stuff not to do better kind of and then get it backwards :D)
About not having any new topics to cover in videos. What about switching to a new type of video, like, Idk, for example reviewing the stats from papers where you would have chosen different analyses and telling us why? Ok I know this is not the point if you want people to take classes with you, but just in case, you might find new motivating ideas for youtube as well? In any case, your content is super super appreciated and useful, whatever you end up doing now. Thanks for all this 🙏
Thanks! To clarify, I'm not running out of video ideas. I have plenty of those! I'm just trying to say I don't NEED to make videos anymore for my own classes.
I feel your pain! Sad that this world is so fucked up. Everything just seems to be done as a quick fix for the immediate problems. I'd love to learn statistics from you! Sadly for now I can't really afford it because it costs a bit less than I make a month. But I have a dream to save this money in the future and take your course. Somehow the field of statistics really fascinates me.
@@QuantPsych I think it's the course simplistics (Live) in november, right? the program looks awesome :) oh wow.. I didn't see that there's a self-guided option for 95 euro. That's really nice! thanks for such affordable prices! Would be fun to be in the live class with you though) maybe some day in the future.
The worst teachers I had were experts in their fields. I'm not saying that's you, I'm saying that using expertise as a criterion for "intro X" curriculum is not the correct argument to make in this case. Also the dunning-kruger effect doesn't actually exist, at least not in the way you show it.
I get what you say. I really do. But being proficient at the scientific frontier of a field does not necessarily make you the best teacher for a entry level course. I don't like fixation on p-values in my field. Nevertheless, my students need to primarily learn p-value stuff in order to read the last 50yrs of publications and the majority of publications at least in the next decade. Most of them will read old stuff far more then produce their own work.
I don't see the conflict. I'm not saying we stop teaching p-values. Instead, we interpret p-values in the context of other pieces of information, like visuals and estimates.
Hi Dustin! I got a BS in business for my undergrad and I’ve been working on my masters in data analytics for the past 6 years 😅 working full time and going to school. I have one class left before finishing. I’m just curious, is it possible for me to become a stat expert if I continue to learn about statistics after graduating and applying my knowledge to my field in business? (I work in insurance so there is A LOT of data to go through.) I know that I enjoy learning stats and applying codes in R. I always wonder if I can be awesome at it
@@shawnshahpari8681 Multivariable calculus is a pre-requisite for Probability which is in turn going to be needed for Mathematical statistics. Can't see how you'd be proficient in Stats without calc.
@@Martyr022 absolutely agreed. Calc doesn't come up very often, but when it does, I'm glad I took those 3 semesters of calculus all those years ago. It's the difference between being able to apply a certain analysis and make sense of the output versus understanding why that analysis is able to do the things it does. I will say linear algebra was an even bigger boost to my understanding of statistics than calculus was, but it took both to lay the groundwork for me to understand things like IRT, certain concepts in machine learning, and the derivation of various statistical tests.
Calc and Linear algebra (and an appetite for math in general) are defo foundational. I'm in my first semester of an applied stats MS. I spent the past 3 years relearning calc and linear algrbra and then diving into the probability theory and "mathematical statistics" (that term kinda makes me chuckle, sorry) material. To really understand probability distributions and the various statistical models you gotta have the maths.
The problem clearly is that there is a complete mismatch between what statisticians know and want and what other scientists do, while conforming to journal statistical requirements (muh pval).
I don't know. If statisticians can't fight the good fight then who can? Us ignoramus can't (I'm a student that stumbled upon statistics literature 💀). We need things to change and you're not alone, because the replication crisis is the best argument for this. Why do things the same way of they are not working? I too am frustrated.
Your textbook seems to be not usable on an android web browser. The table of contents can't be seen alongside the page. I'm not sure if you intended for the book to be desktop only, but I can email you screen recording of what I mean. Either way, great content!
Statistics is a too generous discipline! You share your knowledge to be used by other disciplines. This contributes to the ignorant peak effect. Can you imagine People claiming to be doctors just because they took a few courses on RUclips?.
Quant Psych: Huh. Isn't it crazy how people think they know more about statistics than they really do, thanks to the Dunning-Kruger Effect? Comment Section, having a full-blown Imposter Syndrome episode: Oh my god, he's onto me. I shall never speak about statistics again.
Is it impossible for both of you to work on the new curriculum together? Is this a winner takes all fight to the death between you two? Are you willing to share? I know you're smart, are you smart enough to make your colleague feel respected while also implementing these changes? Is making your colleague feel respected the only true obstacle to making the course changes? I'm just spitballing, man. You don't owe me answers or anything. These questions are just possible tools. They may be sucky tools. I dunno. 🤷♂️
I did try that. Three years before said incident I suggested we work on it together. She said, "Yes, of course." Then developed the curriculum without my input. The second time around (during said incident) the chair (who was mediating our disagreement) suggested that. Again, I said I was willing, but she wasn't.
@@QuantPsych do you teach upper level stats classes? Have you ever passively-aggresively said that students (from her class) were ill-prepared for yours xD
Yeah, I had the same questions while watching this video. Clearly, there are some ego issues from both sides (why is this always the case with math people). In my opinion, there aren't any more possibilities for collaboration after those events. I feel like a lot of "experts" need to go through some communication courses once in a while.
I just chatGPT'd it. It's actually a long-running joke among my PhD cohort. Someone might say, "Wow, that girl's really hot," to which we'd reply, "Yeah, but can she compute the derivative with respect to an eigenvalue? Didn't think so!"
@@QuantPsych He has a channel on RUclips that he’s been adding to since 2009. I became interested when I saw a title along the lines of “real numbers aren’t real.” The channel name is Insights Into Mathematics (@njwildberger).
My dude, I think you are burnt out. I'm working as a lecturer at the moment, so it is impossible to change immediately, but it will change slowly or take time.
Wasn’t it that the statistical proof on the Dunning Kruger Effect was not good? I mean, I think it can be a helpful concept to describe your own ignorance and maybe a learning curve you’re on. When it became an argument on social media I always thought ppl don’t realize how much of a bomerrang insult that is. By the way - thanks for the videos. I find them to be really helpful. I used to work in media business and the most useful think I learned is, that you can create wonderful things if you hire a team of experts and everyone is allowed to put their expertise in the project. I know that there are a few sciences having a discussion about reproducibility etc. But I think your rant hints on a bigger problem. You need to work on your acceptance of the expertise of others. Especially when you are in an environment where some fields within a group may have only one person to represent it. I would argue even outside filmmaking nowadays most things are so complex that they are influenced or done by many people to be completed. Yet, we still have this ideology of the single genius saving the day. In media we celebrate the show runner, when you have a “writers room” coming up with ideas and tons of people to realize them. In science we celebrate the genius paper from the first person who gets his name on it. Ignoring the others that follow, kind of ignoring the work that is quoted in the paper and most definitely not talking about all the failed papers and trials that helped the successful ones to avoid pitfalls.
I do think that's part of the problem--only one person gets credit when so many deserve it. And I think many people realize that, so it ends up being a zero-sum game to get that credit.
You can always do a rework of your old videos or a new approach or a new format of your curriculum, or simply a retake that's adds new information. I don't know. I feel like your videos and playlist are very disjointed and it's hard to find something specific.
I'll share what I think, knowing I could be wrong and also knowing that, even if I'm right, the probability that you'd take my opinion to heart is close to zero. I think you've done more than your part in the fight against bad statistics education. I think it might be time for a career change. I think academia is a completely toxic work environment. I think you're overworked and underpaid and that your expertise and services are outrageously underappreciated. I think you're basically in a toxic abusive relationship with your employer and your colleagues. And I think you're probably smart enough to figure out how to do and teach statistics once you've freed yourself from that hell hole. There are many ways to do that which would remunerate you fairly and more importantly wouldn't be detrimental to your mental health. And I think you have family and friends and students who are negatively affected by your mental health struggles too. Taking care of yourself isn't a selfish thing to do.
To be fair, you're a generalist too if you don't have a PhD in Statistics. You're right there with the woman with a PhD in neurology. You have expertise in quantitative psychology and it's no different really than her having a PhD in neuroscience. You even admit "math stat" isn't your thing. Math stats is Statistics. The applied statistics you know wouldn't exists without mathematical statistics and statistical theory.
I think that's a pretty narrow definition of a specialist. If math stat is the criteria, then having a PhD in stats would be a generalist and only mathematicians would be able to claim expertise. I think you misunderstand quantitative psychology. It's even more specialized than a graduate degree in statistics. A quant psych degree is a very specific branch of statistics that tends to specialize in measurement (though not always). And there are quantitative psychologists that could run circles around most PhD stats graduates when it comes to math stats. (My advisor was one of them). My weakness in math stat is unique to me, not my profession. (And that statement should be qualified that it's a Dunning-Kruger statement--compared to my colleagues, I'm weak, but certainly more qualified than a regular psych PhD graduate). I hope that clarifies things.
You only know the context of a single story. The person was not named or identified in any way. You don’t even know if they’re still working together. So thank you peanut gallery.
This very gatekeepy to the point of vanity. Especially since you said this a matter of an intro stats curriculum, and you're railing against the person with years teaching this curriculum.
Having years of experience doing something stupid doesn't make you an expert. Walter Jackson Freeman II did thousands of lobotomies, but that doesn't mean I'd trust him with an ice pick to my cranium. Of course I'm vain. I'm a RUclipsr.
Hello professor, my name is Teslim. How can I contact you directly?. I have filled a contact form in your website waiting for your reply.. Thank you so much
![FORTNITE CLASSICS IS BACK! Fortnite Item Shop [November 15th, 2024] (Fortnite Chapter 5)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RbQURbeFwqs/mqdefault.jpg)
'I've been studying statistics for nearly 40 years and I still don't understand it. The ease with which non-statisticians master it is staggering' ~ Stephen John Senn (a statistician)
Seriously!
ok ok I will move "Statistics" from Expertise over to Interests in my ResearchGate
Ha! That's not really my point here. The point is to have humility, regardless of your level of expertise, especially if you're making decisions about other people's training.
crazy how this applies to everyone but me
Ha! Thanks for gracing us with your presence, @charlesbwillinams!
Not me. 😂
The guy provides high quality videos and he actually make sure they're ads-free.
Keep up the good work,
Shoutout from Morocco ✌️
Thank you 🙌
“I forget what I know…because I’m always facing what I don’t know” - Fife
This should be framed in the office of every true academic and teacher :) wise words indeed!
Yh I took that as a hopeful message 😂
Thanks! (Except it's spelled Fife).
As someone who aspires to attend a grad program for a PhD in clinical psychology focused on research, your videos are enormously helpful, and I have looked into many different sources on statistics. I would like to say a big thanks for everything you've put out; I have a journal of notes for your videos. Doing statistics well seems to be very difficult, but I am a lot closer because of the information you've put out. The entertainment value is appreciated as well. Your dedication to free and accessible education (especially for a field as complex to get right as statistics) is quite admirable.
Others usually don't question my understanding of psychology, but when they do it is sometimes for good reason as psychology is complex, and I don't understand some concepts as well as I would like to yet. Concerning disagreements, I've found that spending some free time on social psychology, especially attitudes, persuasion, and communication, help me better communicate ideas to others. In addition, I approach the information not with the intent to manipulate but with the intent to properly and fairly explain my reasoning such that if I am incorrect it is easier for others to help me see it. While I do not understand the field enough to give advice up to my standards, researching it has improved my ability to articulate myself considerably. I do understand some subjects on a relatively advanced level, and if I anticipate my audience, and really think about my case beforehand, I can typically articulate it in a way such that, if I do seem to be correct, then others agree. Good luck with this stuff. Your annoyance at the other professors is very fair, but I expect the other professor has at least some good intentions and can be reasoned with (I expect you already understand this of course).
Also, sometimes when I write something out or talk it out with another person, I solve what I was unable to solve talking with myself even if the other person didn't contribute much to the conversation. That could be a reason why you made a video on it. Seeing problems in the field like this is probably better for people to think about than not, so I appreciate there being a video anyways.
Thanks for the input. Despite what it seems, I am not a dogmatic opinionated person. I also believe she has good intentions and she has solid reasons for doing what she's doing. Unfortunately, she's unable to see past her own opinions to see the value in what I'm offering. She's left no room for compromise. Oh well.
I'll try to be brief. Mediocrity in all fields is lauded, and even encouraged and applauded so as to be more "inclusive".
Intellectual rigor is frowned upon in many industries, and "good enough" has literally become a new buzz expression.
I'll share that I've been in the field of Biostatistics for over 40 years, but I'm untrained, and I consider myself mediocre and I actually feel very uneasy and uncomfortable when people say that I'm pretty good in Biostatistics. There's no comparison between devoted, dedicated learning and scholarship, and someone who learned just by doing things over and over again.
A brilliant surgeon once told me "anybody can perform surgery, but you need someone who's trained when things go wrong."
Imagine trusting someone who taught himself or herself to fly a plane, or build a bridge? Would folks knowingly fly in that plane or drive across that bridge? Same deal with scholarship and expertise and academic excellence except that death isn't the outcome.
Like martial arts, one has to dedicate one's life to practice and training to become a master, but those new to martial arts want to fly in the sky and perform acrobatics as if in a circus.
Suffice it to say that you're not just gifted in Statistics, but in pedagogy also, and you have mastered your area of expertise to such a great extent that you are able to take exceedingly difficult subjects, and convey them so lay-persons, such as myself and, can easily digest.
And that my friend is your rare and uncommon gift. BAM!
Excuse typos...
I love that analogy! I will say though that you shouldn't discount your own abilities. I am self-taught in R and that was a long-standing source of insecurity. I don't remember what made me realize I really was an expert, but I started to see my self-taught-ness as a strength, not a weakness. (Especially when I started to "accidentally" discover best-practices that I would have learned from an actual class).
@@QuantPsych Thanks for your sincere words of encouragement. Professors such as yourself are a rare find these days. The notion of "Teaching being a Noble Profession", like Medicine, has been lost. Fortunately in your case, your Pop successfully passed on the baton to his worthy and capable son. BAM!
That's very kind of you. I'll forward your message to my dad (who, by the way, is an incredible teacher but never graduated from college).
@@QuantPsych Amazing family! And it shows. 👏
Expert is thrown around in every subject in my company. It’s embarrassing I think clients love it. Humility is the key. Awesome post Justin. Everyday is a school day…. Love your work.
Hello Dr. Fife, first of all, your channel has taught me a lot. I think I have seen 60% of your videos so far (yes, including the old ones where you had different "guests" and all). As your student-even though you don't know who I am- I stopped liking hypothesis testing, to name something very basic we both have in common. But I didn't stop liking hypothesis testing because you are an expert. And even though I have seen your CV, I believe you are right because you have good arguments for it. I think it is problematic that your main argument with this person at the stats department is that you are more "an expert" than her. That's not a productive discussion in my view. I am a dentist, and when I was studying, many of my teachers were making mistakes that they wanted me to do, based on the fact they were the experts. I think you are right in your argumentation, but not based on yourself, or who you are, or what you studied. You are right because your arguments have a good basis.
Anyway, the Berlin Wall fell also because of institutions: the Stasi being overwhelmed, Solidarity in Poland, NATO pressure, the West German government, groups like Neues Forum, the Lutheran church, the SED-Socialist Unity Party. What I want to say is, there are fights that are appropriate for a man, there are fights that are appropriate for institutions, and there are others that require more than even that.
Greetings from Chile
Do not give up! You are making a difference. Maybe you do not see it, but your material and publications are helping me to understand what is going wrong with stats in microbiology and infection biology. I am including your view on data for my medical students and in my lab. I am trying, too! I feel you, and I am fighting the old system, too. Hold on! We will manage!😊. P.S.: how possible is for you to move the "office hours" to 2 hours ahead? I am on Europe and your current time will make me a very grumpy and tired PI. 😂
Ha! I'm totally open to that. Let me contact the other students and see if they're willing to bump it ahead. If not, I'm certainly open to that in the future.
@@QuantPsych cool. Let me know 😊
Go ahead and contact me directly. You know how to do that?
@@QuantPsych email to Uni address? I think I have it... I was the curious padawan asking about your book. 😊
I am a data analyst and bioinformatician in microbial ecology, I use R every day but I am not a statistician. I am teaching stats for bio this semester for the first time and the course was structure the same way as a similar level course I took 30 years ago…
And, by the way, I love your content and I hope you keep doing more videos. It helps me as many others!
great...it's not just a psychology problem
It was when p
Your videos have been added as optional content for our Psych Honours program. I ❤ your work, and I think you have found your purpose. Please keep keeping-on! You will beside me as I undertake my Psych PhD.
Also - I'd give you the "super like" donation per video, but it isn't an option...
Ooh! I didn't even know about this! Thanks for pointing it out :)
That's a great thing about being a programmer. Nobody thinks they're an expert until they're really really good. Whenever you start to think, "I'm an expert programmer." You realize you have no idea how you would go about programming something like a spreadsheet.
I'm a big fan of your work. My dear professor, you are the best.
Please keep up the great work.
Greetings from Egypt.
❤❤❤❤
Thanks! 😃
Most challenging class in stats was math. stats in my case. It took me almost 2 yrs to really understand the math. stats. Today I love it to read about math stats contents and proofs. If you really like stats you have to spend time and resources to do research and studies, which the most people do not do.
Hi Professor Fife,
I wanted to quickly thank you! I was able to grab your Introduction to Simplistics course on sale, and I’m excited to get started.
As I head into my psychology honours year, I’m ready to build on the brilliance of the past while challenging what can be improved. We’re in this fight with you, and your course will be key in that journey.
Looking forward to putting it all to good use!
Best,
Ashley
Brisbane, Australia
Fantastic!
This one resonated so hard with me. Take comfort in knowing that it's not just you. I study work for a living. Nothing irks me more than econ PhDs who, almost universally, study the economy narrowly (due to the narrowing of the field).
They aren't experts on work, organizations, business, incentives, motivation, productivity...and yet they presume to know so much about these things and tend to have a LOT of influence because of their credentials. Specifically, when non-economists hear _economics_ they think _indecipherable math_ and turn off their critical thinking skills. Not all economists are equal. Most new PhDs are at peak Dunning-Kruger, while others think their narrow expertise generalizes far beyond their training.
And re neuroscience specifically, there are the Andrew Huberman types. No comment. Anyway, you're not alone.
That woman is delusional. One would not get offended by questioning knowledge in a science field, but I guess that's what happens.
I immediately doubt the expertise of anyone that looks puzzled if I mention "sigma algebras" or "pullback measure". I mean, can you really call yourself a statistician is you don't know what a Radon measure is? ;)
Definitely NOT gatekeeping. Her saying that she is an expert because she teaches intro stats is like a highschool AP calculus teacher claiming they are an expert in mathematics. Its INSANE. Don't worry! The students who are eager to learn will have your back!
I'm definitely not an expert in statistics. I'm just an applied data scientist. The thing that blew my mind during my master's degree, was when a statistician (meteorologist) showed as multiple papers as a case study on econometrics. It took two weeks as there were a lot of papers. He wanted to showcase HOW MANY GRAVE MISTAKES were made by all sorts of prestigious -nonetheless- people, particularly on regression analysis. At first the whole class was skeptical. After the first lecture it was really interesting for everyone. I didn't have an idea by then how bad this thing is. It goes without saying that all those papers were reviewed and were published by the best of the best journals. This grounded me hard and it was one of the most humiliating experiences I had. And I'm thankful for that because I thought I was really good at these stuff.
Love that idea!
That graph provided at the beginning is NOT the actual Dunning Kruger effect! ruclips.net/video/kcfRe15I47I/видео.html
Thanks for the correction
always such an irony to see people citing the meme graph
Citing memes as an academic is perfectly legitimate and a foundation scientific discovery :)
Dunning kruger is overstated - particularly that graph.
unless @tomwright9904 is an expert in the dunning kruger effect :)
Dustin you’re a legend.. keep up the good fight!!
Thanks!
Pascal said it first...
“The world is a good judge of things, for it is in natural ignorance, which is man's true state. The sciences have two extremes which meet. The first is the pure natural ignorance in which all men find themselves at birth. The other extreme is that reached by great intellects, who, having run through all that men can know, find they know nothing, and come back again to that same ignorance from which they set out; but this is a learned ignorance which is conscious of itself. Those between the two, who have departed from natural ignorance and not been able to reach the other, have some smattering of this vain knowledge and pretend to be wise. These trouble the world and are bad judges of everything. The people and the wise constitute the world; these despise it, and are despised. They judge badly of everything, and the world judges rightly of them.”
btw, I am a neuroscientist who teaches intro stats and I am aware of knowing squats when it comes to stats ;) (but I love the subject and passionate about teaching it)
Love that quote!
So funny you mention derivatives wrt eigenvalue. Just had to learn some of it for the real part of a complex eigenvalue this summer for application in my own PhD (in stats) research.
Well… I FULLY agree, after quite some years studying stats and digging myself more and more into research, intro stat curriculum makes no sense.
Everything feels taken out of a magic box without the fundamentals.
This is my first interaction with your content, I’ll check your stats teaching directions, now that I’m also curious about the topic.
I heard one paper make the argument that the way we teach statistics is like teaching surgeons to perform operations without them knowing biology. It's ridiculous!
its contagious. I got so sad watching it till the middle
Sorry!
This is an interesting video. As a recent PhD in a subfield of epidemiology studying methodology, I can relate to this, and yet I often get people who say: "You're an epidemiologist, not a statistician..." - I'd be interested in your Part II of this rant where you discuss Quant Psych vs. Econometricians vs. Epidemiologists vs. 'Statisticians' etc.
That's a great idea! And yes, the same thing happens to me. 🤦
It might be worth considering the where you are on the Knowledge/Confidence curve for curriculum development.
Thank you
Would you mind sharing your suggested curriculum for the class? Edit: Oh, there's already some links to check out ...
60 credit hours in STATs and I am still humble to know there’s too much crap to remember. Also, too much mathematical derivations and the mathematical techniques to remember.
I recently attended a seminar of 4th year psych students presenting their thesis work, without the discussion bit they are still working on atm. One project was discussing data scraping and the teaching staff seemed really excited by the findings - from Reddit - and the prospect of running similar studies and getting those published. My concern is that on social media there is nothing preventing bots and AI from posing as humans, or humans to just write whatever narrative they find fun to put out instead of being, or at least trying to be honest. If this is a new direction of research I am concerned
During engineering school, I mentioned I took 'statics' (introductory branch of mechanics/physics) and soooo many people pipe up. I've also taken statistics....... 😂
I think something that helps get across just how much expertise even just a grad student has over an individual who doesn't have the expertise. Just getting a PhD in a specific field gives in excess of like 10000 hours on that ONE subject ALONE, and that is also high level experience rather than just learning the nuts and bolts of the subject. Assuming this other professor who was claiming to be an expert because they had taught this intro statistics course for like 10 years is not going to come close to even the level of hours of practice a PhD student in statistics would get in the subject, not to mention the experience they get after grad school researching and publishing. Obviously, the professor is going to have some understanding of statistics, especially to be able to conduct their own analyses, but it's not even going to be near the amount of time an individual who has gotten their PhD in statistics or statistics related field has spent studying the subject of statistics alone.
Love this! I remember on one project, I wasn't getting the answers I expected. So I ended up rewriting the algorithm to perform a factor analysis. I eventually figured out what my problem was and in the process was like, "oh...I get factor analysis now!" That's the sort of experience you don't get if you're just teaching stats.
Great video. I always thought that every academic journal publisher should employ a statistician to check over every paper before going to reviewers. It would improve science by a million percent.. but perhaps there are just not enough good statistician's out there.
Yes, that is the problem.
motivational comment: thanks for your content!
I appreciate that!
I'm a medical doctor. Dunning-Kreuger effect is rampant in medical interations. Really your mother's friend's cousin is a nurse's aid and she says I should treated your pyelonephritis with cranberry juice? Sure, I'll hold the ICU bed ready for you. Seriously, though, it's a matter of trust - people will trust their mother's friend's cousin because their connection, however thin, is thicker than it is to the stranger in the white coat. Similarly, they will trust their passing familiarity with stats moreso than the funny guy in the gray polo.
As someone who is knew to this (just started PhD), I have to say I am optimisitc that there will be changes for the better. Obviously this won't happen overnight. My PhD is a meta-resarch project on inapproatiate methods in medical statistics, research waste and common statistical problems. We're out here in teams working on this!
I do have to keep reminding myself that there are others actively working on it :)
@@alexandergibson6243 oh boy I need to read your manuscript because I need it starting my phd 😂
@@QuantPsych Have a search up of AIMOS (Association for interdisiplinary meta-research and open science). I am loosly connected and is a great community for this stuff! We have a conference in Australia at the end of this year (yearly).
I know exactly what you mean. We also should renew our statistics classes, but nobody is willing to, even the new stats prof is relying on the oldschool literature and way of teaching it :D
But dealing with p-values is possible as long as you really ponder on how to interpret them (not on how not to interpret them, because students seem to remember the stuff not to do better kind of and then get it backwards :D)
That should be part II of this video--how statisticians perpetuate bad practices.
About not having any new topics to cover in videos. What about switching to a new type of video, like, Idk, for example reviewing the stats from papers where you would have chosen different analyses and telling us why?
Ok I know this is not the point if you want people to take classes with you, but just in case, you might find new motivating ideas for youtube as well?
In any case, your content is super super appreciated and useful, whatever you end up doing now. Thanks for all this 🙏
Thanks! To clarify, I'm not running out of video ideas. I have plenty of those! I'm just trying to say I don't NEED to make videos anymore for my own classes.
Gatekeeping is good sometimes.
I feel your pain! Sad that this world is so fucked up. Everything just seems to be done as a quick fix for the immediate problems. I'd love to learn statistics from you! Sadly for now I can't really afford it because it costs a bit less than I make a month. But I have a dream to save this money in the future and take your course. Somehow the field of statistics really fascinates me.
You mean for the live class?
@@QuantPsych I think it's the course simplistics (Live) in november, right? the program looks awesome :) oh wow.. I didn't see that there's a self-guided option for 95 euro. That's really nice! thanks for such affordable prices! Would be fun to be in the live class with you though) maybe some day in the future.
Feel free to contact me directly and maybe we can work something out.
@@QuantPsych thank you! I really appreciate your willingness to help!☺
Does she watch your videos? ❤ I subscribe, watch, and love your videos. 😊
Ha. No idea.
The worst teachers I had were experts in their fields. I'm not saying that's you, I'm saying that using expertise as a criterion for "intro X" curriculum is not the correct argument to make in this case.
Also the dunning-kruger effect doesn't actually exist, at least not in the way you show it.
I get what you say. I really do. But being proficient at the scientific frontier of a field does not necessarily make you the best teacher for a entry level course. I don't like fixation on p-values in my field. Nevertheless, my students need to primarily learn p-value stuff in order to read the last 50yrs of publications and the majority of publications at least in the next decade. Most of them will read old stuff far more then produce their own work.
I don't see the conflict. I'm not saying we stop teaching p-values. Instead, we interpret p-values in the context of other pieces of information, like visuals and estimates.
Hi Dustin! I got a BS in business for my undergrad and I’ve been working on my masters in data analytics for the past 6 years 😅 working full time and going to school. I have one class left before finishing. I’m just curious, is it possible for me to become a stat expert if I continue to learn about statistics after graduating and applying my knowledge to my field in business? (I work in insurance so there is A LOT of data to go through.)
I know that I enjoy learning stats and applying codes in R. I always wonder if I can be awesome at it
The road to being a statistician starts with Linear Algebra and Calculus, and then moving on to probability and mathematical statistics.
I’m not an expert but after 6 years of being a stat student I know enough to realize that it doesn’t start with calculus.
@@shawnshahpari8681 Multivariable calculus is a pre-requisite for Probability which is in turn going to be needed for Mathematical statistics. Can't see how you'd be proficient in Stats without calc.
@@Martyr022 absolutely agreed. Calc doesn't come up very often, but when it does, I'm glad I took those 3 semesters of calculus all those years ago. It's the difference between being able to apply a certain analysis and make sense of the output versus understanding why that analysis is able to do the things it does. I will say linear algebra was an even bigger boost to my understanding of statistics than calculus was, but it took both to lay the groundwork for me to understand things like IRT, certain concepts in machine learning, and the derivation of various statistical tests.
Calc and Linear algebra (and an appetite for math in general) are defo foundational. I'm in my first semester of an applied stats MS. I spent the past 3 years relearning calc and linear algrbra and then diving into the probability theory and "mathematical statistics" (that term kinda makes me chuckle, sorry) material. To really understand probability distributions and the various statistical models you gotta have the maths.
The problem clearly is that there is a complete mismatch between what statisticians know and want and what other scientists do, while conforming to journal statistical requirements (muh pval).
Exactly!
cool rant, keep it going.
Keep ranting? Yes, always.
I don't know. If statisticians can't fight the good fight then who can? Us ignoramus can't (I'm a student that stumbled upon statistics literature 💀). We need things to change and you're not alone, because the replication crisis is the best argument for this. Why do things the same way of they are not working? I too am frustrated.
Your textbook seems to be not usable on an android web browser. The table of contents can't be seen alongside the page. I'm not sure if you intended for the book to be desktop only, but I can email you screen recording of what I mean. Either way, great content!
I've noticed that on my iphone too. I'll fix it someday :)
Statistics is a too generous discipline! You share your knowledge to be used by other disciplines. This contributes to the ignorant peak effect. Can you imagine People claiming to be doctors just because they took a few courses on RUclips?.
Of course I've heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect. I think we all have. After all, we see Kamala Harris on TV every night...
Quant Psych: Huh. Isn't it crazy how people think they know more about statistics than they really do, thanks to the Dunning-Kruger Effect?
Comment Section, having a full-blown Imposter Syndrome episode: Oh my god, he's onto me. I shall never speak about statistics again.
Haha. Yeah, I shouldn't be surprised that happened, but that certainly wasn't my intention.
Is it impossible for both of you to work on the new curriculum together? Is this a winner takes all fight to the death between you two? Are you willing to share? I know you're smart, are you smart enough to make your colleague feel respected while also implementing these changes? Is making your colleague feel respected the only true obstacle to making the course changes?
I'm just spitballing, man. You don't owe me answers or anything. These questions are just possible tools. They may be sucky tools. I dunno. 🤷♂️
I did try that. Three years before said incident I suggested we work on it together. She said, "Yes, of course." Then developed the curriculum without my input. The second time around (during said incident) the chair (who was mediating our disagreement) suggested that. Again, I said I was willing, but she wasn't.
@@QuantPsych do you teach upper level stats classes? Have you ever passively-aggresively said that students (from her class) were ill-prepared for yours xD
Yeah, I had the same questions while watching this video. Clearly, there are some ego issues from both sides (why is this always the case with math people). In my opinion, there aren't any more possibilities for collaboration after those events. I feel like a lot of "experts" need to go through some communication courses once in a while.
@@ekaterinaaladyeva2085 I was actually suggesting he be passive-aggressive lol
@Martyr022 Ha! Unfortunately, all my advanced classes are graduate level and she only teaches undergrads.
Well i was about to ask for resources on how to calculate the derivative with respect to eigen values haha
I just chatGPT'd it.
It's actually a long-running joke among my PhD cohort. Someone might say, "Wow, that girl's really hot," to which we'd reply, "Yeah, but can she compute the derivative with respect to an eigenvalue? Didn't think so!"
You sound like the stats version of Norman Wildberger. Have you checked him out? He’s on a crusade to rethink the foundations of mathematics.
I have not! But now I'm interested!
@@QuantPsych
He has a channel on RUclips that he’s been adding to since 2009. I became interested when I saw a title along the lines of “real numbers aren’t real.” The channel name is Insights Into Mathematics (@njwildberger).
My dude, I think you are burnt out. I'm working as a lecturer at the moment, so it is impossible to change immediately, but it will change slowly or take time.
Wasn’t it that the statistical proof on the Dunning Kruger Effect was not good? I mean, I think it can be a helpful concept to describe your own ignorance and maybe a learning curve you’re on. When it became an argument on social media I always thought ppl don’t realize how much of a bomerrang insult that is. By the way - thanks for the videos. I find them to be really helpful.
I used to work in media business and the most useful think I learned is, that you can create wonderful things if you hire a team of experts and everyone is allowed to put their expertise in the project. I know that there are a few sciences having a discussion about reproducibility etc. But I think your rant hints on a bigger problem. You need to work on your acceptance of the expertise of others. Especially when you are in an environment where some fields within a group may have only one person to represent it. I would argue even outside filmmaking nowadays most things are so complex that they are influenced or done by many people to be completed. Yet, we still have this ideology of the single genius saving the day. In media we celebrate the show runner, when you have a “writers room” coming up with ideas and tons of people to realize them. In science we celebrate the genius paper from the first person who gets his name on it. Ignoring the others that follow, kind of ignoring the work that is quoted in the paper and most definitely not talking about all the failed papers and trials that helped the successful ones to avoid pitfalls.
I do think that's part of the problem--only one person gets credit when so many deserve it. And I think many people realize that, so it ends up being a zero-sum game to get that credit.
You can always do a rework of your old videos or a new approach or a new format of your curriculum, or simply a retake that's adds new information. I don't know. I feel like your videos and playlist are very disjointed and it's hard to find something specific.
I definitely do need to update my playlists.
I'll share what I think, knowing I could be wrong and also knowing that, even if I'm right, the probability that you'd take my opinion to heart is close to zero. I think you've done more than your part in the fight against bad statistics education. I think it might be time for a career change. I think academia is a completely toxic work environment. I think you're overworked and underpaid and that your expertise and services are outrageously underappreciated. I think you're basically in a toxic abusive relationship with your employer and your colleagues. And I think you're probably smart enough to figure out how to do and teach statistics once you've freed yourself from that hell hole. There are many ways to do that which would remunerate you fairly and more importantly wouldn't be detrimental to your mental health. And I think you have family and friends and students who are negatively affected by your mental health struggles too. Taking care of yourself isn't a selfish thing to do.
Yes, I'm sure my kids are sick of my complaining :) I appreciate the input. It is something I've thought about.
To be fair, you're a generalist too if you don't have a PhD in Statistics. You're right there with the woman with a PhD in neurology. You have expertise in quantitative psychology and it's no different really than her having a PhD in neuroscience. You even admit "math stat" isn't your thing. Math stats is Statistics. The applied statistics you know wouldn't exists without mathematical statistics and statistical theory.
I think that's a pretty narrow definition of a specialist. If math stat is the criteria, then having a PhD in stats would be a generalist and only mathematicians would be able to claim expertise. I think you misunderstand quantitative psychology. It's even more specialized than a graduate degree in statistics. A quant psych degree is a very specific branch of statistics that tends to specialize in measurement (though not always). And there are quantitative psychologists that could run circles around most PhD stats graduates when it comes to math stats. (My advisor was one of them). My weakness in math stat is unique to me, not my profession. (And that statement should be qualified that it's a Dunning-Kruger statement--compared to my colleagues, I'm weak, but certainly more qualified than a regular psych PhD graduate). I hope that clarifies things.
Whoever is correct in this, airing your disagreement out and criticizing her publicly is not very professional
You only know the context of a single story. The person was not named or identified in any way. You don’t even know if they’re still working together. So thank you peanut gallery.
this is the pettiness that is rampant in academia sadly. so many fragile egos
Your comment reminded me that I never actually told you who this person was. Here's her RUclips channel: ruclips.net/video/dQw4w9WgXcQ/видео.html
@@QuantPsych mannnnnnn
This very gatekeepy to the point of vanity. Especially since you said this a matter of an intro stats curriculum, and you're railing against the person with years teaching this curriculum.
Having years of experience doing something stupid doesn't make you an expert. Walter Jackson Freeman II did thousands of lobotomies, but that doesn't mean I'd trust him with an ice pick to my cranium.
Of course I'm vain. I'm a RUclipsr.
Hello professor, my name is Teslim. How can I contact you directly?.
I have filled a contact form in your website waiting for your reply..
Thank you so much
Just emailed you.
@@QuantPsych Thank you so Professor