Fall 2018 Lab Members (Part 1)

This semester, eight undergraduates will be working in The Peer Lab, on projects related to kindergarten readiness, the effects of praise on failure, and attention in bullying situations. Here is what some of them have been up to this summer:

Read More
Rachael Reavis
Summer Team

Three students are working in the Peer Lab this summer. At Earlham, every student can access a paid internship or research experience through EPIC Advantage. Many students get more than one experience! All three students working this summer are being funded through summer research funds or McNair, so they are eligible for an additional paid research or internship experience.

Read More
Rachael Reavis
Living Lab

The Joseph Moore Museum is Earlham’s on-campus museum. It hosts different events throughout the semester like Brain Explorers. Brain Explorers is an event where students provide hands-on exploration stations of the brain and nervous system. This year, we participated by having our disgust station. It was all part of our living lab model that connects the public more directly to the research process.

Read More
Rachael Reavis
Conferences

This semester, all six team members presented work at conferences.

Three students presented a poster at the Mid-America Undergraduate Psychology Research Conference (MAUPRC). They discussed our Living Lab exhibit at the Joseph Moore Museum.

Three students presented a poster at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, the major professional conference for child development. They presented results from our studies on praise and fixed/growth mindset.

Read More
Rachael Reavis
Fixed Mindset Team

This semester, the Peer Lab is big enough that we need two teams! The Fixed Mindset team is predominantly responsible for our studies on Fixed Mindset. They are also working on a study about disgust with collaborators from the University of Mississippi.

Read More
Rachael Reavis
p-hacker

As I alluded to in my previous post, questionable research practices can be used to maximize the chance of a result being “statistically significant” (where p < .05).

There are a couple of apps that demonstrate how researcher choices (sample size, collecting extra participants, looking at multiple outcomes, etc.) can lead to erroneous conclusions.

Read More
Rachael Reavis