ChatGPT is melting our brainpower, killing creativity, and making us soulless — or so the headlines imply. We dig into the study behind the claims, starting with quirky bar charts and mysterious sample sizes, then winding through hairball-like brain diagrams and tens of thousands of statistical tests. Our statistical sleuthing leaves us with questions, not just about the results, but about whether this was science’s version of a first date that looked better on paper.
Statistical topics
- ANOVA
- Bar graphs
- Data visualization
- False Discovery Rate correction
- Multiple testing
- Preprints
- Statistical Sleuthing
Methodological morals
- "Treat your preprints like your blind dates. Show up showered and with teeth brushed."
- "Always check your N. Then check it again."
- "Never make a bar graph that just shows p-values. Ever."
Kristin and Regina’s online courses:
- Demystifying Data: A Modern Approach to Statistical Understanding
- Clinical Trials: Design, Strategy, and Analysis
- Medical Statistics Certificate Program
- Writing in the Sciences
- Epidemiology and Clinical Research Graduate Certificate Program
Programs that we teach in:
Find us on:
Kristin - LinkedIn & Twitter/X
Regina - LinkedIn & ReginaNuzzo.com
- () - Intro
- () - Media coverage of the study
- () - The experiment
- () - Sample size issues
- () - Bar chart sleuthing
- () - Blind date analogy
- () - Interview results
- () - Simple text analysis results
- () - Natural language processing results
- () - N-gram and ontology analysis results
- () - Teacher evaluation results
- () - Neuroimaging analysis
- () - Multiple testing and connectivity issues
- () - Brain adaptation results
- () - Wrap-up, rating, and methodological morals
Smart linkhttps://pc.st/e/6G5tABxdrbj
Official sitehttps://www.normalcurves.com/
Auto-openhttps://pc.st/e/6G5tABxdrbj?a
Add podcast to the siteEmbed Podcast




