10.2 Blinding: Difference between revisions
More actions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Cover|10.2 Blinding}} | |||
Blind analysis has emerged as the newest addition to the scientific process to guard against scientists' own confirmation bias, especially in high-precision experiments involving complex analyses, by preventing the scientists from seeing the result of their analysis as they refine and debug the analysis procedure. We illustrate blinding techniques and their dramatic effect through a simple measurement experiment. | Blind analysis has emerged as the newest addition to the scientific process to guard against scientists' own confirmation bias, especially in high-precision experiments involving complex analyses, by preventing the scientists from seeing the result of their analysis as they refine and debug the analysis procedure. We illustrate blinding techniques and their dramatic effect through a simple measurement experiment. | ||
Revision as of 20:31, 21 February 2024
Blind analysis has emerged as the newest addition to the scientific process to guard against scientists' own confirmation bias, especially in high-precision experiments involving complex analyses, by preventing the scientists from seeing the result of their analysis as they refine and debug the analysis procedure. We illustrate blinding techniques and their dramatic effect through a simple measurement experiment.
The Lesson in Context
This lesson offers solutions to potential pitfalls in scientific studies raised in 10.1 Confirmation Bias and 4.2 Finding Patterns in Random Noise. We use a stick measurement activity to illustrate the effects of confirmation bias and to motivate techniques to reduce its effect, especially blind analysis. These techniques are not universally employed in all fields of science today, and students pursuing a scientific career are encouraged to introduce these techniques in their own work.
Takeaways
After this lesson, students should
- Recognize what types of blinding are useful for solving what types of errors.
- Be able to explain why blind analysis might be needed, by explaining the errors that can arise in its absence.
- Recognize when blind analysis is being used and explain what function it serves. Identify situations and decisions in which blind analysis would be useful.
- Be able to evaluate techniques (e.g., registered replication, adversarial collaboration, peer review)
- for ability to address confirmation bias, and
- in comparison to blind analysis.
- Propose how to use blind analysis for simple studies.
Blind Analysis
Double Blind
| Students may confuse blind analysis with a double blind experiment. The latter is used primarily in treatment testing in conjunction with a placebo, such that the patient is prevented from knowing whether they received the real treatment or placebo, and the doctor is also prevented from knowing this fact in order not to inadvertently reveal this fact to the patient through subtle signs. The former type of blinding applies to the analysis process once the data has been collected. In the case of treatment testing, blind analysis may be employed whether or not double blinding is. |
Preregistration
Registered Replication
Registered Reports
Adversarial Collaboration
Peer Review
Muon [math]\displaystyle{ g }[/math]−2 Experiment
- This experiment performed highly precise measurements of the magnetic dipole moment of muons to test the theoretical predictions of the currently accepted model of elementary particles. Blinding is done by injecting a secret code into all of the data that would undergo analysis, so that the scientists involved would not make specific choices in the analysis in a way that makes the final value agree with the theoretical prediction. The secret code was kept in a physical locker, the opening of which was highly publicized in the announcement event. Once the data was "unscrambled", the result shows that there is indeed a sizeable deviation of the measured value from the theoretical prediction.
[math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-hacking and Preregistration
- One way in which [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-hacking could occur is to choose or alter the analysis method after one has seen the results of that method to be undesirable. As an example, suppose a psychologist performs an experiment with 100 participants, sees that the results are at a statistical significance of [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math] = 0.06, just shy of the [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math] < 0.05 threshold for publication. They then decide to recruit another 100 participants to "improve their results", finally leading to [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math] = 0.04, good enough for publication. This is a form of [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-hacking, as [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math]-values can dip below 0.05 as one slowly increases the sample size simply by random chance. To guard against this phenomenon, the sample size of a study is a required item in the preregistration process.
Additional Content
You must be logged in to see this content.
