In
regression (a common statistical practice used in social science research) we
often attempt to predict the outcome of a given dependent measure (the DV)
based on what we know about other measured variables theoretically related to
the DV (the IVs). This common regression method has one problem though: We are
predicting values for data that we have already collected. What if we were to
engage in actual prediction? That is, what if we attempted to predict the values
of a DV that is unknown? How might we do this and what would be the benefit?
This
was a fascinating talk presented by Liz Page-Gould of the University of Toronto
at the Future of Social Psychology Symposium!
I
love the idea of actually predicting the future. Practically, future prediction
means that our theoretical models must be able to generalize across samples and
studies (theories that do not generalize won’t predict much). Prediction means
that theories must also be more sophisticated—instead of focusing on a single
predictor of a given DV, models must take care to account for the multiple
factors that predict individual outcomes. Focusing on prediction also means
that our field must build a cumulative science—updating and integrating existing
theoretical models to create predictions that perform better than more
incomplete versions. Instead of creating new theories, a predictive science
would need to carefully evaluate the predictive validity of new theories before
they are integrated into the literature, or deployed as policy. Neat!
No comments:
Post a Comment