7 responses

  1. Shawna
    June 13, 2010

    I like the details of your teaching methods and would like to see more posts like this. I’m always interested in hearing about how others run their classrooms.

  2. Melissa
    June 15, 2010

    I couldn’t comment on your page of relevant I/O links so I figured I’d do it here, but I just wanted to say thanks for posting so many amazing resources and that I completely agree that we don’t have nearly enough I-O resources online… it’s odd to me that there isn’t a more centralized way to find Twitter and RSS feeds that are truly I-O (NOT HR, executive coaching that has little to do with any real “evidence” or general business and human capital-related)…

    I also wanted to tell you that I’m the owner of Psychology Applied to Life (http://psychoflife.wordpress.com/) and that I’ve more or less moved over to my own domain…. and that I’m doing my best to be a more active blogger and look forward to reading more of your stuff!

  3. Richard N. Landers
    June 15, 2010

    It was odd to me too – that’s what led to the list! I’ve updated your web address on the I/O blogs list and have your RSS in my reader. Looking forward to seeing where you go with Psych at Work.

  4. disgruntledphd
    June 18, 2010

    The graphic actually comes from a paper published in the Lancet. I believe it was the front page of the London Independent.

    The paper itself is here: Nutt Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs.pdf

  5. Richard N. Landers
    June 18, 2010

    Ahh, that is very informative, thank you. It appears my suspicion 5/#1 (“this list was modified by the editor”) is correct – the original paper uses much finer shades of distinction, which changes a lot of my original assumptions. The number of expert raters they used was still 8 to 16 though, depending on the entry – a lot better than 3, but still a fairly small number.

    In my undergrad statistics classrooms, I’ve considered a few times looking at how papers are misrepresented in the media (rather than just statistics themselves), but because they don’t have a background in research methods at that point, ultimately concluded it muddied the overall message I wanted to get across.

    Maybe in a methods course though…

  6. Melissa
    June 22, 2010

    Thank you so much for updating and adding me – I appreciate it and am very flattered! Let’s hope I can educate the masses about the amazing things I-O can do!

  7. Mike
    July 9, 2010

    I just want to know how they calculate the “danger rating”. I’ve done most of these substances and I’m still around to comment on it.

Leave a Reply




Back to top
mobile desktop