Quant stats

an usual or expected practice, rather like custom

Anyone can come up with an idea and if it's corroborated it should be recognised

Nothing is ever accepted as absolute truth

Everything is shared in an open access community

being impartial in assessing your work as well as everyone else's

don't make stuff up

based on first hand experiences of the world

doctrine that ascribes superior truth-status to things that have been directly observed or manipulated over tings that cannot be observed or manipulated

adherence to a system of reasoning

faith that rationality is the best guide to decision making

a combination of empiricist and rationalist ideas

all researchers engage with the unknown (both friend and foe)

a systematic error with measurement (not random)

Qualitative distortion; confusing one thing for another

• Quantitative distortion; systematic inaccuracy 
• eg; over report about ourselves to bolster social desireability

Missing or indeterminate information (to do with data analytic techniques)

• Missing information 
• form of incompleteness

• Indeterminate information 
• form of incompleteness

Likelihood of an event

• Multiple possible meanings 
• need more information to decide 
• nothing to do with stats 
• eg; hot food

• A range of values 
• usually on a scale 
• nothing to do with stats

• Uncertainty can be; 
•  described
• quantified (sometimes) 
• estimated 
• manipulated in service of the researcher

• How the researcher is to describe the object of their investigations (definition)
• eg: What is trust?

• concerns research questions and hypotheses 
• eg: Is there a testable hypothesis? Or is the research being done to discover the hypothesis?
• generative vs experimental research

• Refers to the design of the study 
• eg; will it suit our purposes, answer our questions, test our hypothesis???

Related to the analysis and to some extent the interpretation of data

despite having good data and sound stats, still not able to decide between competing interpretations