Albert Georg Lang

Bio: Albert Georg Lang is an academic researcher from University of Düsseldorf. The author has contributed to research in topics: Windows Vista. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 30063 citations.

G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences

Abstract: G*Power (Erdfelder, Faul, & Buchner, 1996) was designed as a general stand-alone power analysis program for statistical tests commonly used in social and behavioral research. G*Power 3 is a major extension of, and improvement over, the previous versions. It runs on widely used computer platforms (i.e., Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Mac OS X 10.4) and covers many different statistical tests of thet, F, and χ2 test families. In addition, it includes power analyses forz tests and some exact tests. G*Power 3 provides improved effect size calculators and graphic options, supports both distribution-based and design-based input modes, and offers all types of power analyses in which users might be interested. Like its predecessors, G*Power 3 is free.

Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses.

Abstract: G*Power is a free power analysis program for a variety of statistical tests. We present extensions and improvements of the version introduced by Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, and Buchner (2007) in the domain of correlation and regression analyses. In the new version, we have added procedures to analyze the power of tests based on (1) single-sample tetrachoric correlations, (2) comparisons of dependent correlations, (3) bivariate linear regression, (4) multiple linear regression based on the random predictor model, (5) logistic regression, and (6) Poisson regression. We describe these new features and provide a brief introduction to their scope and handling.

Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

Abstract: A study with low statistical power has a reduced chance of detecting a true effect, but it is less well appreciated that low power also reduces the likelihood that a statistically significant result reflects a true effect. Here, we show that the average statistical power of studies in the neurosciences is very low. The consequences of this include overestimates of effect size and low reproducibility of results. There are also ethical dimensions to this problem, as unreliable research is inefficient and wasteful. Improving reproducibility in neuroscience is a key priority and requires attention to well-established but often ignored methodological principles.

Neurotoxic reactive astrocytes are induced by activated microglia

Abstract: This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01 AG048814, B.A.B.; RO1 DA15043, B.A.B.; P50 NS38377, V.L.D. and T.M.D.) Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation (B.A.B.), the Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research (B.A.B.), Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation (B.A.B.), the JPB Foundation (B.A.B., T.M.D.), the Cure Alzheimer’s Fund (B.A.B.), the Glenn Foundation (B.A.B.), the Esther B O’Keeffe Charitable Foundation (B.A.B.), the Maryland Stem Cell Research Fund (2013-MSCRFII-0105-00, V.L.D.; 2012-MSCRFII-0268-00, T.M.D.; 2013-MSCRFII-0105-00, T.M.D.; 2014-MSCRFF-0665, M.K.). S.A.L. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (GNT1052961), and the Glenn Foundation Glenn Award. L.E.C. was funded by a Merck Research Laboratories postdoctoral fellowship (administered by the Life Science Research Foundation). W.-S.C. was supported by a career transition grant from NEI (K99EY024690). C.J.B. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-2125-12). L.S. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the German Research Foundation (DFG, SCHI 1330/1-1).

The essential guide to effect sizes : statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results

Abstract: List of figures List of tables List of boxes Introduction Part I. Effect Sizes and the Interpretation of Results: 1. Introduction to effect sizes 2. Interpreting effects Part II. The Analysis of Statistical Power: 3. Power analysis and the detection of effects 4. The painful lessons of power research Part III. Meta-Analysis: 5. Drawing conclusions using meta-analysis 6. Minimizing bias in meta-analysis Last word: thirty recommendations for researchers Appendices: 1. Minimum sample sizes 2. Alternative methods for meta-analysis Bibliography Index.

Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants

Abstract: Participant attentiveness is a concern for many researchers using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Although studies comparing the attentiveness of participants on MTurk versus traditional subject pool samples have provided mixed support for this concern, attention check questions and other methods of ensuring participant attention have become prolific in MTurk studies. Because MTurk is a population that learns, we hypothesized that MTurkers would be more attentive to instructions than are traditional subject pool samples. In three online studies, participants from MTurk and collegiate populations participated in a task that included a measure of attentiveness to instructions (an instructional manipulation check: IMC). In all studies, MTurkers were more attentive to the instructions than were college students, even on novel IMCs (Studies 2 and 3), and MTurkers showed larger effects in response to a minute text manipulation. These results have implications for the sustainable use of MTurk samples for social science research and for the conclusions drawn from research with MTurk and college subject pool samples.