As a survey methodologist, I find myself frequently playing detective to find out what methods were used to arrive at reported finding in the media, government reports, peer-reviewed literature and other outlets. What kind of sample was used, and how were people recruited into the study? How where questions asked? What specific questions were asked? How were data analyzed?
That puts me in the position to see a lot of good and bad science. Some of the things I come across are quite notable (in fact they are often in the media already). I use them when teaching methods and statistics, and when setting policies and practices for the work I'm involved with. At times, the science is so good or so bad that it shapes how I do my work personally.
Yet I've never had a central place to keep track of these stories. This blog will be that place.
Check back later as I begin to post. I will probably announce posts on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, and ResearchGate (and maybe Twitter if I ever start using it), so follow me there. Or follow my other two more active blogs (survmeth.blogspot.com and researchefficiency.blogspot.com)
