BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jonas Moss

Jonas Moss contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Applicationsmath.STMethodologyStatistics Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
4topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Infinite Diameter Confidence Sets in Hedges' Publication Bias Model

Meta-analysis, the statistical analysis of results from separate studies, is a fundamental building block of science. But the assumptions of classical meta-analysis models are not satisfied whenever publication bias is present, which causes inconsistent parameter estimates. Hedges' selection function model takes publication bias into account, but estimating and inferring with this model is tough for some datasets. Using a generalized Gleser-Hwang theorem, we show there is no confidence set of guaranteed finite diameter for the parameters of Hedges' selection model. This result provides a partial explanation for why inference with Hedges' selection model is fraught with difficulties.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Modelling publication bias and p-hacking

Publication bias and p-hacking are two well-known phenomena that strongly affect the scientific literature and cause severe problems in meta-analyses. Due to these phenomena, the assumptions of meta-analyses are seriously violated and the results of the studies cannot be trusted. While publication bias is almost perfectly captured by the weighting function selection model, p-hacking is much harder to model and no definitive solution has been found yet. In this paper we propose to model both publication bias and p-hacking with selection models. We derive some properties for these models, and we compare them formally and through simulations. Finally, two real data examples are used to show how the models work in practice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access