[Code and Data]

For this tutorial, we’ll be plotting some weather data from a site call Weather Underground. You can download temperature readings and weather events for your local area in a comma-separated file.

I’ve put weather data for Bloomington, IN in a file called weather.csv. Each row is one day, and there are columns for min/mean/max temperature, dew point, wind speed, etc. We’ll be plotting temperature and weather event data (e.g., rain, snow).

Read more…

Titus Brown doesn’t like this web site. He’s OK with the content (I think), but he finds it awkward to use, and while I don’t feel as strongly as he does, I accept that we have outgrown WordPress. The question is, what should we use instead? We need a lot more than just a blog and some static web pages, but learning management systems like Moodle weren’t built with our ad hoc model in mind (they’re really teaching administration systems), and newer tools like P2PU feel like a step backward. I started thinking about requirements for a replacement back in April, but got distracted. Here’s a longer look.

Read more…

Here’s how registration is going for upcoming events:

If you’d like to join us, there’s still plenty of space—and if you have friends who could use some training in basic software skills, please point them our way.

J.M. Wicherts, M. Bakker, and D. Molenaar: “Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results“. PLoS ONE, 6(11): e26828, 2011, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026828.

Background

The widespread reluctance to share published research data is often hypothesized to be due to the authors’ fear that reanalysis may expose errors in their work or may produce conclusions that contradict their own. However, these hypotheses have not previously been studied systematically.

Methods and Findings

We related the reluctance to share research data for reanalysis to 1148 statistically significant results reported in 49 papers published in two major psychology journals. We found the reluctance to share data to be associated with weaker evidence (against the null hypothesis of no effect) and a higher prevalence of apparent errors in the reporting of statistical results. The unwillingness to share data was particularly clear when reporting errors had a bearing on statistical significance.

Conclusions

Our findings on the basis of psychological papers suggest that statistical results are particularly hard to verify when reanalysis is more likely to lead to contrasting conclusions. This highlights the importance of establishing mandatory data archiving policies.

Our two-day workshop at the University of Alberta wound up a couple of hours ago. We had quite a few no-shows this time (which was annoying, given how many people were waitlisted), but those who did come seemed to get a lot out of it:

Many thanks to Rose, Neil, and Paul for making it possible.

We have just added another workshop to the summer’s list, this one at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on July 16-17. Please let friends and colleagues know—I look forward to meeting them.

We’re pleased to announce that we will be running a two-day boot camp at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore on June 18-19, 2012. We only have space for 20 participants, so please register early.

This week’s Newcastle bootcamp, organised by the Digital Institute at Newcastle University with the Software Sustainability Institute and SoundSoftware, was the first Software Carpentry boot camp run entirely locally in the UK. For the organisers it was a slightly nervous experience, hoping we could get the material to hold together in presentation without Greg’s experience at hand.

Feedback from the learners was generally good on the material, the venue and the structure. The most common complaint was that it was hard to follow along at times, and I think there are several areas where we’ll be able to improve the “flow” for future events.

Notably, this was the first bootcamp I’ve attended at which nobody found the room too crowded or the wrong temperature. Result, Newcastle!

Here are the good and bad feedback points. Some points were close duplicates, and I’ve put the additional ones in brackets (e.g. Python was cited three times).

You can find links to the material we used on the page about the bootcamp.

A recent article in The Atlantic titled, “How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught By Reddit” describes how GMU’s Prof. T. Mills Kelly has had students fake history online, and how their most recent effort unraveled. There’s lots to think about here regarding what scientists should know about using the web, trusting it, and making it their own…

We are pleased to announce that we will be running two boot camps in Ontario in July: one at the University of Waterloo on July 12-13, and another at the University of Toronto (Scarborough) on July 19-20. If you’d like to take part, please sign up, and please let friends and colleagues know about them as well.