eScholarship
metadata only
Lay Sensitivity to Sampling and Selection Errors in Scientific Studies
Laypeople and experts struggle to reason accurately about scientific evidence. Here, we tested whether laypeople noticed methodological flaws related to participant sampling and selection. Across four studies (n = 1,031), we investigated whether lay readers could identify sampling and selection erro
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Changes In Scientific Publishing: A Heuristic For Analysis#657602
- Generics in science communication: Misaligned interpretations across laypeople, scientists, and large language models#705423
- SelectionBias: An R Package for Bounding Selection Bias in Causal Estimands#1104802
- Linguistic Discrimination in Science: Can English Disfluency Help Debias Scientific Research?#109859
- Studying the Clinical Trial Experiences of Patients With Mesothelioma#854709
Record · ID 1079025
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive