





4

JS


New message
Navigation pane

Favorites

Junk Email
822
items

Inbox
60
unread
Add favorite


Folders

Inbox
60
unread

Junk Email
822
items

Drafts
240
items

Sent Items


Deleted Items
6
unread

Archive

Conversation History


Notes

Pictures

New folder


Groups

New group
Upgrade to Office 365 with premium Outlook features







Reply



Delete

Restore

Junk


Move to


Categorize






RE: Expecting a reasonable response.
This message was sent with High importance. You replied on Mon 12/16/2019 7:21 PM

This message was sent with High importance.

You replied on Mon 12/16/2019 7:21 PM
O




Open Access Journal of Complementary & Alternative Medicine
Sun 12/15/2019 12:09 PM
You
OAJCAM.MS.ID.000128.pdf
284 KB


Dear Dr. Joel Snell,

Hope this email finds you in good health.

We are happy to inform you that we are done with the galley proof and PDF of your article ID: OAJCAM-19-OP-130 titled “IN DEFENSE OF MULTIPLE REGRESSION: A RENEWED EFFORT TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC” for publication in our Open Access Journal of Complementary & Alternative Medicine (OAJCAM).

Enclosed is the PDF of article, we would be glad to know your acceptance to publish it in online prior to this let me know if you have any modifications required in the final version of the PDF.

Please track the below link to make the payment of $300 towards your article ref ID: OAJCAM-19-OP-130.
https://lupinepublishers.com/pay-online.php

Lupine Publishers payment methods | Open Access
Lupine Online Publishers is a multidisciplinary, scholarly Open Access publisher focused on Genetic, Biomedical and Remedial missions in relation with Technical Knowledge as well. Our Lupine Publishers maintains a scrupulous, methodical, fair peer review System. Besides, quality control is riveted in each step of the publication process.
lupinepublishers.com

Hope you will support us with your kind contribution.

Await your response.

Cynthia Paul
Editorial Manager

From: Open Access Journal of Complementary & Alternative Medicine (OAJCAM)
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 11:32 AM
To: Joel Snell
Subject: Expecting a reasonable response.
Importance: High

Dear Dr. Joel Snell,

Hope everything is fine and good at your end!

Till now I dint receive any response from you regarding your status of your manuscript. May I know the reason behind your silence?

Expecting a reasonable response.

Cynthia Paul
Editorial Manager

Archived. Ctrl + Z to Undo.

OAJCAM.MS.ID.000128.pdf

Download

Print

Hide email



111
Copyright ©
All rights are reserved by
Joel Snell.
Open Access Journal of Complementary
& Alternative Medicine
Opinion
In Defense of Multiple Regression: A Renewed Effort to
Educate the Public
Joel Snell*
Arlington Institute, USA
*Corresponding author:
Joel Snell, Arlington Institute, USA
Received:
November 27, 2019
Published:
December 11, 2019
Introduction
Social sciences findings shaky
“The reliability of social science studies has been thrown into
question, after an attempt to replicate project 21 high profile
experiments yielded only 13 successful reproductions. The two
year research project centered on studies that were published
between 2010 and 2015 in highly respected journals Science and
Nature…” THE WEEK, September 14, 2018, 20.
Description
In a working paper entitled “Multiple Regression: Evolution
and Analysis” SOCIALVIBES.NET/ Numerous critics indicate that
Multiple Regression that emerged in general academia in the
“Big Data Days” (early to mid 70’s) was basically” junk science.”
Promoters indicated that the formula was a sign that the soft social
sciences had grown closer to the hard sciences. A computer could
do the work of numerous clerks, handling portions of a problem
back in the 50’s and 60’s. Now the computer could solve the
problem in minutes. However, not all numbers gathered were of the
necessary interval level which is needed for the formula. However,
there is overwhelming support for Multiple Regression. Numerous
articles describe and inadvertently or directly support it. It is not
the research strategy Multiple Regression that is at fault, but the
quality of the data that is used. The researcher, reviewer, or editor
misses the poor quality of the data that is analyzed.
It is now more important than ever. From a new book Andersen
(2017) approximates that whatever was “normal” deconstructed
into chaos around the year 2000 or the turn of the century… This
New York Times bestseller is written by a decorated social science
writer with numerous books, periodicals, and media reporting
suggests that from the Left strategies and research is of poor
quality. However, he does not say all is wrong. From the Right, the
Evangelical movement has had overwhelming growth dealing with
their own academic appearing studies and Christian published
books. Entire stores are devoted to this information. Further, they
can partner with large corporations that appear to be destroying the
planet. Additionally, out right “fakes news” has become normalized.
Again, he does not say all of their information is wrong. Thus, the
average citizen does not know what to believe. However, the least
strong points should be noted. Thus, two computations emerge…
1) to make nominal numbers, into interval integers a researcher
arbitrarily takes the formula of nominalism and added a zero.
Therefore, 0+1=1/2=.05. So, the division of two numbers by
2 makes it an interval number S Trochim [1] Multiple regression
needs all interval numbers or greater (ratio numbers) to complete
the task. In number 2, numerous attempts were made, but two
researchers in 1984, found that making an ordinal number into
an interval number did not disturb the outcomes. Winship C et al.
[2]. Thus, all numbers used in multiple regressions are interval or
ratio. Until a better measure is introduced it would appear to this
author that a few strategies can monitor and increase validity. One
is to allow lesser measures into manuscripts and the publication
“counts” toward tenure. Two, make a transition in the social
sciences, that a refereed manuscript found acceptable must then go
to a “Replicator.” This person has an excellent reputation and is paid
or given last authorship on a paper. He then retests the manuscript.
Other strategies include using triangulation where the multiple
regressions are also complimented by original observations and
exhaustive related literature review [3]. Last, create a longitudinal
study (not a panel study) in which descriptive statistics are used to
see certain variables are more prevalent than others to “explain” the
dependent variable (identity groups and/or demographic groups)
may also be useful. Further, get the word out to quality periodicals
that Multiple Regression works and that criticism has been helpful
to improve the strategy. It is a great story and can also be splintered
into small articles sent to national and local distributors. Therefore,
mainstream social sciences and related are doing something
about this issue. Last invite Replicators to analyze a quality article
to discover if there are some false positives that make multiple
regressions in error. The Replicator should be known to the editor
and journal reviewers and must be given attribution with the other
writers.
ISSN: 2644-1217
DOI:
10.32474/OAJCAM.2019.02.000128

Citation:
Joel Snell
. In Defense of Multiple Regression: A Renewed Effort to Educate the Public. Open Acc J Comp & Alt Med
2(1)- 2019. OAJCAM.
MS.ID.000128. DOI:
10.32474/OAJCAM.2019.02.000128
.
Volume 2 – Issue 1
C
opyrights @
Joel Snell
.
Open Acc J Comp & Alt Med
112
Summary and Conclusion
Although Multiple Regression has lost a great deal of prestige
relative to its accuracy it is worth saving. The author indicates some
strategies.
References
1.
Trochim S (2006) Research Knowledge Base. Social research methods.
2.
Winship C, Mare R (1984) Regress Models with Ordinal Values American
Sociological Review 8: 512-515.
3.
Snell Joel (2019) Multiple Regression: Evolution and Analysis. Social
vibes.net
.
This work is licensed under Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 License
To Submit Your Article Click Here
:
Submit Ar
ticle
Open Access Journal of Complementary
& Alternative Medicine
Assets of Publishing with us
•
Global archiving of articles
•
Immediate, unrestricted online access
•
Rigorous Peer Review Process
•
Authors Retain Copyrights
•
Uniqu