//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...









Loading...
“Just collect more data” is one of the most common responses to uncertainty in quantitative research. But in a lot of social science, that advice is impossible—or even misleading. Our new working paper asks: when has a study reached its information limit? Check it out here: osf.io/preprints/so...
“Just collect more data” is one of the most common responses to uncertainty in quantitative research. But in a lot of social science, that advice is impossible—or even misleading. Our new working paper asks: when has a study reached its information limit? Check it out here: osf.io/preprints/so...
16h
16h
The punchline is not “stop collecting data.” It is to evaluate studies relative to what was credibly possible in their empirical setting. Small or constrained studies are not automatically failed designs. And larger datasets are not automatically more informative.