Stephanie Tully

292 posts

Stephanie Tully

Stephanie Tully

@StephMTully

Marketing professor @USCMarshall, and visiting scholar @FederalReserve. Researching consumer finances and experiences.

参加日 Mart 2014
479 フォロー中1.8K フォロワー
固定されたツイート
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Tenured! I am so grateful for all of the people who led me to today. Too many to name you all, but a special thanks to my amazing advisor Tom Meyvis who forever changed my life (I miss you), my awesome colleague & tenure chair @real_k_diehl, & my great coauthor @EeshaSharma.
English
31
2
183
11.5K
Quentin André
Quentin André@andre_quentin·
Marketing tweeps: There are several datasets of A/B tests results (e.g., the Upworthy Reserach Archive). I'm looking for an A/B test dataset that would report performance metrics split by consumer segments (e.g., men vs. women, 15-24 vs. 25-34...)... Anything comes to mind?
English
2
2
7
1.5K
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Definitely concerning. The silver lining is that this may make researchers think harder. It puts more emphasis on the need for stronger theory (given less data availability). Tenure committees will need to consider productivity expectations as a result of this though.
Ethan Mollick@emollick

Online research surveys may be a dying methodology as techniques for verifying respondents as humans are failing: “Automatic AI detection systems are currently completely unusable… Individual attention checks will no longer be a sufficient tool to ensure good data quality.”

English
0
0
2
516
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Interesting new research on the prevalence of p-hacking in A/B testing in e-commerce by my awesome colleague @alexpmil . Check it out!
Alex P. Miller@alexpmil

💡I am happy to announce new research with @KHosanagar. Available below and forthcoming in 𝘐𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘚𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩.💡 Link (PDF): alexmiller.phd/research/p-hac… We study p-hacking, A/B testing, data-driven decision making, and more. Short thread below👇

English
0
0
7
457
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
How do AI disclosures on social media affect our engagement with content? Check out this thread to learn about our new research. Led by two great USC PhD students - Steve Carney & @ignacioriverosg
English
0
2
8
1.1K
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Job market candidates - reframe the purpose of your job talk accordingly! I used to view my talks as people evaluating me and my competency. Once I reframed them as an opportunity to tell people what I've learned through research, my talks improved so much.
English
0
3
72
7.1K
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Agreed! Moreover, it's not just that new settings may show different results, but different executions aimed at addressing these behavioral science principles within the same setting can show different results.
Oleg Urminsky@OlegUrminsky

"Read about 4 #BehavioralScience principles that #FinTech designers should consider testing in their own context," because the generalizability and application of even highly robust behavioral science principles to a specific context is not trivial.

English
0
0
8
743
Peter McGraw
Peter McGraw@PeterMcGraw·
I am in no rush to die, but as Bernard Williams argued, immortality robs life of meaning. With infinite tomorrows, why do anything today? The urgency of our finitude motivates our actions. Death isn't desirable, but it makes life worth living.
Bryan Johnson@bryan_johnson

@HartmutBock Why do you want to die? What is the philosophy?

English
1
1
3
556
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
@JZBerman While I think weird wouldn’t upset lots of people (many like to be weird), I think the idea is that republicans in particular like to fit in and being weird is more problematic to them. So it’s more to annoy them than to persuade others.
English
0
0
1
86
Jonathan Berman
Jonathan Berman@JZBerman·
I’m unconvinced that calling politicians weird is an effective persuasion tactic.
English
4
0
4
964
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
@lakens @andre_quentin @RJ_Youngling As you'll see in my original thread, I do not think any pre-reg is a silver bullet & all research should be critically evaluated w/ and w/o pre-reg. I 100% agree with you that we don't want non-replicable research published & offered another approach in my OT.
English
1
0
1
99
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
I'm disappointed to hear this take. We need more people to pre-reg, not less. The sad truth is that there are always ways a researcher can get around a pre-reg, even with more specificity. (1/4)
Daniël Lakens@lakens

This paper will be the starting point for a discussion about whether we should from now on treat an AsPredicted preregistration as No Preregistration. The template has so little detail you can still publish a set of 5 studies, none of which replicate. That is problematic.

English
5
0
23
6.3K
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
@lakens @andre_quentin @RJ_Youngling S1 pre-reg had poor wording choice “at least 330”, but the supp materials indicate they had 337 responses which seems consistent w/ posting for 330 on an online platform.
English
1
0
1
136
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
@RJ_Youngling Also you posting that I shouldn’t be allowed to express my disagreement with the original thread is quite a hypocritical stance.
English
1
0
3
178
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
@RJ_Youngling The original thread says that the failed rep should be a call to question all AP pre-reg. But the OP assumes this w/o reading. A read of the paper, the supp materials, & the pre-regs shows that QRPs are unlikely the issue & other pre-reg wouldn’t fix it.
English
2
0
1
416
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
The best way to improve science is to encourage integrity in research practices. Rather than criticizing pre-reg methods, we should be talking about changing the systems and incentives that encourage people to publish non-replicable results. (4/4)
English
0
1
12
701
Stephanie Tully
Stephanie Tully@StephMTully·
Reviewers & readers need to individually evaluate the value of any pre-reg in conjuction with the data. But telling people an imperfect pre-reg is worthless isn't going to bring more people on board, & more specificity in pre-reg isn't going to erase failures to replicate. (3/4)
English
1
0
11
709