This example is from The Economist and behind a paywall. However, it is worth using one of your free monthly views to see these visualizations of how much improvement Ps experience. That said, whenever I talk about antidepressants in class, I remind my students MANY TIMES that I'm not that kind of psychologist, and even if I was, I'm not their psychologist. Instead, they should direct any and all medication questions to their own psychologist. This blog post was inspired by " Antidepressants are over-prescribed, but genuinely help some patients " from The Economist, which was in turn inspired by  " Response to acute monotherapy for major depressive disorder in randomized, placebo-controlled trials submitted to the US FDA: individual participant data analysis", by M.B. Stone et al., BMJ, 2022; "Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy: updated comparisons and meta-analyses of newer versus older trial s", ...

This NPR story is a summary of the decisively titled " The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses " authored by Dr. John Ioannidis. The NPR story provides a very brief explanation of meta-analysis and systematic reviews. It explains that they were originally used as a way to make sense of many conflicting research findings coming from a variety of different researchers. But these very influential publications are now being sponsored and possibly influenced by Big Pharma. This example explains conflicts of interest and how they can influence research outcomes. In addition to financial relationships, the author also cites ideological allegiances as a source of bias in meta-analysis. In addition to Dr. Ioannidis, Dr. Peter Kramer was interviewed. He is a psychiatrist who defends the efficacy of antidepressants. He suggests that researchers who believe that placebos are just as effective as anti-depressants tend to analy...

This syllabus for  PSY 607: Everything is Fucked ,  made the rounds last week. The syllabus is for a course that  purports  that science is fucked. The course readings are a list of articles and books that hit on the limitations of statistics and research psychology ( p -values, shortcomings of meta-analysis, misuse of mediation, replication crisis, etc.). PSY 607 isn't an actual class ( as author/psychologist/blogger Srivastava explains in this piece from The Chronicle ) but it does provide a fine reading list for understanding some of the current debates and changes in statistics and psychology.  Most of articles are probably too advanced for undergraduates but perfectly appropriate for teaching graduat e students about our field and staying up to date as instructors of statistics. Here is a link to the original blog post/syllabus. 

My favorite data is data that is both counter-intuitive and tests the efficacy of commonly held beliefs. Emily Oster's (writing for 538) presents such  data in her investigation of vitamin efficacy . The short version of this article: Data that associates vitamins with health gains are based on crap observational research. More recent and better research throws lots of shade on vitamin usage. Specific highlights that could make for good class discussion: -This article explains the flaws in observational research as well as an example of how to do good observational research well (via The Physician's Health Study , with large samples of demographically similar individuals as described in the portion of the article featuring the Vitamin E study). This point provides an example of why controlled, double-blind lab research is the king of all the research. -This is an accessible example as most of your students took their Flintstones. -The article also demonstrates The Thir...

Geoff Cumming Geoff Cumming gave a talk at APS 2014 about the " new statistics " (reduced emphasis on p-value, greater emphasis on confidence intervals and effect sizes, for starters). This workshop is now available, online and free, from APS . The three hour talk has been divided into five sections, and each sections comes with a "Table of Contents" to help you quickly navigate all of the information contained in the talk. While some of this talk is too advanced for undergraduates, I think that there are portions, like his explanation of why p-values are so popular, p-hacking, confidence intervals can be nice additions to an Introduction to Statistics class.

Center for Open Science (COS) is an  organization  that seeks " to increase openness, integrity, and reproducibility of scientific research " . As a social psychologist, I am most  familiar  with COS as a repository for experimental data. However, COS also provides free consulting services as to teach scientists how to make their own research processes more replication-friendly .  As scholars, we can certainly take advantage of these services. As instructors, the kind folks at COS are willing to provide workshops to our students (including, but not limited to, online workshops). Topics that they can cover include:  Reproducible Research Practices, Power Analyses, The ‘New Statistics’, Cumulative Meta-analyses, and Using R to create reproducible code (or more information on scheduling, see their availability  calendar ). I once heard it said that the way you learn how to conduct research and statistics in graduate school will be the way you...