Project description:We discuss the results on improving the generalizability of individualized treatment rule following the work in Kallus [1] and Mo et al. [5]. We note that the advocated weights in Kallus [1] are connected to the efficient score of the contrast function. We further propose a likelihood-ratio-based method (LR-ITR) to accommodate covariate shifts, and compare it to the CTE-DR-ITR method proposed in Mo et al. [5]. We provide the upper-bound on the risk function of the target population when both the covariate shift and the contrast function shift are present. Numerical studies show that LR-ITR can outperform CTE-DR-ITR when there is only covariate shift.
Project description:Root-secreted coumarins and the microbiota interact to improve iron nutrition in Arabidopsis. Harbort and Hashimoto et al. Cell Host & Microbe 2020
Project description:In this commentary, I discuss some critical issues in the study by Greiff, S.; Stadler, M.; Sonnleitner, P.; Wolff, C.; Martin, R., "Sometimes less is more: Comparing the validity of complex problem solving measures", Intelligence 2015, 50, 100-113. I conclude that-counter to the claims made in the original study-the specific study design was not suitable for deriving conclusions about the validity of different complex problem-solving (CPS) measurement approaches. Furthermore, a more elaborate consideration of previous CPS research was found to challenge Greiff et al.'s conclusions even further. Therefore, I argue that researchers should be aware of the differences between several kinds of CPS assessment tools and conceptualizations when the validity of CPS assessment tools is examined in future research.
Project description:As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves "truth discernment" of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test (n = 701) was unsuccessful (p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment: d = 0.14, control: d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.