scholarly journals Autism genetics: Methodological issues and experimental design

2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (10) ◽  
pp. 946-957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Sacco ◽  
Carla Lintas ◽  
Antonio M. Persico
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Autism Genetics

Field Experiments and Natural Experiments

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan S. Gerber ◽  
Donald P. Green
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Growth And Development ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Observational Research ◽  
Natural Experiments ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Political Methodology ◽  
Field Experimentation ◽  
The Many

This article evaluates the strengths and limitations of field experimentation. It first defines field experimentation and describes the many forms that field experiments take. It also interprets the growth and development of field experimentation. It then discusses why experiments are valuable for causal inference. The assumptions of experimental and nonexperimental inference are distinguished, noting that the value accorded to observational research is often inflated by misleading reporting conventions. The article elaborates on the study of natural experiments and discontinuities as alternatives to both randomized interventions and conventional nonexperimental research. Finally, it outlines a list of methodological issues that arise commonly in connection with experimental design and analysis: the role of covariates, planned vs. unplanned comparisons, and extrapolation. It concludes by dealing with the ways in which field experimentation is reshaping the field of political methodology.

scholarly journals Challenges for Preclinical Investigations of Human Biofield Modalities

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. gahmj.2015.013.
Author(s):  
Gloria Gronowicz ◽  
William Bengston ◽  
Garret Yount
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Therapeutic Touch ◽  
Clinical Protocols ◽  
Short History ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Preclinical Models ◽  
Healing Touch ◽  
History Of

Preclinical models for studying the effects of the human biofield have great potential to advance our understanding of human biofield modalities, which include external qigong, Johrei, Reiki, therapeutic touch, healing touch, polarity therapy, pranic healing, and other practices. A short history of Western biofield studies using preclinical models is presented and demonstrates numerous and consistent examples of human biofields significantly affecting biological systems both in vitro and in vivo. Methodological issues arising from these studies and practical solutions in experimental design are presented. Important questions still left unanswered with preclinical models include variable reproducibility, dosing, intentionality of the practitioner, best preclinical systems, and mechanisms. Input from the biofield practitioners in the experimental design is critical to improving experimental outcomes; however, the development of standard criteria for uniformity of practice and for inclusion of multiple practitioners is needed. Research in human biofield studies involving preclinical models promises a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying the efficacy of biofield therapies and will be important in guiding clinical protocols and integrating treatments with conventional medical therapies.

Methodological Issues in Experimental Design and Interpretation

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Guala
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Experimental Economics ◽  
Research Program ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Daily Work ◽  
Scientific Debate ◽  
Asking Questions ◽  
The One

This article is organized around two topics: the first one is the methodology of experimental economics, a research program that is becoming increasingly influential in contemporary economic science. The second one is normative methodology, an issue that has been widely debated by philosophers of economics over the last two decades. A methodological discussion of experimental economics could simply aim at describing the methods used by experimental economists in their daily work, without asking questions of efficacy or justification. Another approach, the one that is pursued here, is to take a more direct normative stance: instead of passively observing what economists do, the philosopher steps down in the arena of scientific debate and tries to issue some cautious advice on methodological matters.

Identifying suboptimalities with factorial model comparison

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Ji Ma
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Model Comparison ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Multiple Forms ◽  
Factorial Experimental Design ◽  
Factorial Model ◽  
Multiple Components ◽  
The Many

AbstractGiven the many types of suboptimality in perception, I ask how one should test for multiple forms of suboptimality at the same time – or, more generally, how one should compare process models that can differ in any or all of the multiple components. In analogy to factorial experimental design, I advocate for factorial model comparison.

Combining integrated systems-biology approaches with intervention-based experimental design provides a higher-resolution path forward for microbiome research

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Alfredo Blakeley-Ruiz ◽  
Carlee S. McClintock ◽  
Ralph Lydic ◽  
Helen A. Baghdoyan ◽  
James J. Choo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systems Biology ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Integrated Systems ◽  
Microbiome Research ◽  
Constructive Criticism

Abstract The Hooks et al. review of microbiota-gut-brain (MGB) literature provides a constructive criticism of the general approaches encompassing MGB research. This commentary extends their review by: (a) highlighting capabilities of advanced systems-biology “-omics” techniques for microbiome research and (b) recommending that combining these high-resolution techniques with intervention-based experimental design may be the path forward for future MGB research.

Statistics and parallaxes

1978 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 7-29
Author(s):  
T. E. Lutz
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Statistical Methods ◽  
Review Paper ◽  
Systematic Errors ◽  
Past Experience ◽  
Random Errors ◽  
Trigonometric Parallaxes ◽  
Systematic And Random Errors

This review paper deals with the use of statistical methods to evaluate systematic and random errors associated with trigonometric parallaxes. First, systematic errors which arise when using trigonometric parallaxes to calibrate luminosity systems are discussed. Next, determination of the external errors of parallax measurement are reviewed. Observatory corrections are discussed. Schilt’s point, that as the causes of these systematic differences between observatories are not known the computed corrections can not be applied appropriately, is emphasized. However, modern parallax work is sufficiently accurate that it is necessary to determine observatory corrections if full use is to be made of the potential precision of the data. To this end, it is suggested that a prior experimental design is required. Past experience has shown that accidental overlap of observing programs will not suffice to determine observatory corrections which are meaningful.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document