[Interview]: Get to know Lazar

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#22
Haha! Yeah, if I say "approximate fit index" three times Les Hayduk might appear, and then we're all in trouble... :p

See what CB is saying here SEMNET he is happy to betray the very principals of science!!!! ;) [edit: This is my bad Les impersonation].

In all seriousness I am somewhere inbetween on this debate. I point to the Box quote that all models are approximations (heavily paraphrased) and thus for a suffciently sized sample any model will be rejected. This suggests a focus on statistical tests alone are unworkable. This issue is a realy problem for me as I have sample sizes in the 10 to 20,000 and beyond where the chi-square statistics is VERY unforgiving. Having said that reliance on fit indices too often leads to shovel misfit under the carpet and often there is no serious attempt to identify where misfit is coming from. This is a major problem. I try hard to a) always inspect MIs to see where the sources of fisfit are coming from and i make a point to know how the various fit indices are calculated and what biases they have. I am also a fan of using MC simulation to see what one should expect for a give sample and model.

p.s. note that I ignored the T20 question completely
 

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#24
What kind of music do you like?
At the moment I am listening to metric's new cd and I really like all of their stuff. I also like Tegan and Sarah, Missy Higgins, Lady Hawk, Kimbra, La Roux, and Placebo. When in more fellow moods I listen To Martha or Rufus Wainwright. For older stuff I like Jonny Cash.

Do you play any instruments?
Yes I play the guitar, bass, and drums but have not touched any instrument in about six months. Actually I saw today that my guitar has a cover of mould on it which is not a good sign.

Favorite Firefly character? Why?
I did say Jayne earlier and he is my favourite particularly for comedy value in that vain I also like Wash "Its ok I'm a leaf on the wind"
 

spunky

Can't make spagetti
#25
i thought someone had asked this before but apparently no one has.... are you married? gf? children? (if there are no children, are you interested in having them in the future?)
 

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#26
@Spunky

Yes I have been married for eight years (I got married at 20...gulp!). As for children I doubt it for a while my wife is just starting her PhD and I am trying to establish my career.
 

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#28
Yes 28. PhD programs are slightly shorter here than in the US so I got out a little quicker than you guys will but yes I have been lucky to have had a good PhD supervisor and colleagues who got me a quality post-doc. All things that are very helpful in academia
 

CB

Super Moderator
#29
Continuing on the theme of opening cans of worms... What do you think of Joel Michell's critiques of "measurement" in psychology (or the lack thereof)? Do you have anything to do with him, being in the same city?
 

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#32
Continuing on the theme of opening cans of worms... What do you think of Joel Michell's critiques of "measurement" in psychology (or the lack thereof)? Do you have anything to do with him, being in the same city?
I think Michell has some frighteningly good points that I spend my time completely ignoring for the sake of my sanity and my job :)

We are hoping to get him to speak at the quantitative special interest group that I run next year. I dont know him personally but my colleagues do. Be sure that if/when he presents I will post the slides and film of the talk here.
 

CB

Super Moderator
#33
in north america we refer to him as "He-who-must-not-be-named".
LOL :) I'll been trawling through old discussions on the talking measurements list lately... Denny Borsboom seems to be the only one who argues (sort of) against Michell's position, at least in the sense of disagreeing that psychometrics is conspirationally pathological or that the issues that Michell raises are the most important problems with the field. So I guess that makes Denny Harry Potter? :p
 

spunky

Can't make spagetti
#34
So I guess that makes Denny Harry Potter? :p
better than that. he's probably one of the sexiest intellectuals alive as of today. i'd marry him in a second (ignoring the fact that he's already married & with 2 kids, of course). plus the fact that our positions with respect to the existence of the latent variable are so similar is almost scary (and makes him right, of course :p). AND I'M GONNA EXPECTO PATRONUM THE HECK OUT OF ANYONE WHO DARES DISAGREE
 

Dason

Ambassador to the humans
#35
Does Expecto Patronum do anything against entities other than Dementors? (Clearly this is a question for Lazar but I guess Spunky can answer if they so choose)
 

spunky

Can't make spagetti
#36
i've heard it can be usde against evil stuff... havent read the books yet so i'm not sure about the details but i'm pretty sure it does sometihng like that. it has not (i repeat: it has not) been tested with bots and raptors yet, but that Michell guy CB mentioned is definitely a Dementor under human disguise who is bent on making sure people like me go unemployed. good thing the US gov't is on our side in this one ;)

it has been rumoured that the Cauchy Distribution can also be scared away with the Patrnous charm, albeit it needs to be a very powerful one from a very experienced statistician
 
#37
28 and postdoc and researcher and lecturer to grad students and married for 8 years?!! :) WOW :tup: Glad you're here :)

Some of my questions:

As a psychologist, do you think or hope that psychology can bring piece to mankind? Why? Why not?

Do you consider psychology a modern kind of religion? Or science? or both? or anything else [what then?], Why? why not?

What is the meaning of life from your point of view? ;)

What is the meaning of life taught by the school of psychology? Do you think it is valid? Why? why not?

What is your idea about metaphysics? Do you think psyche presented in psychology as some scientific component is another name for the soul presented by religions?

Do you think science and meta-science will embrace into one entity in future? why? why not?

Do you believe in god? Why? If not, why?

Do you believe in synchronicity? Why? Why not?

Do you think the author of "The Secret" is a charlatan? Why? why not?

How many articles have you published so far? How many other acceptances have you got?
 

Lazar

Phineas Packard
#38
wow lots of questions :)
28 and postdoc and researcher and lecturer to grad students and married for 8 years?!! :) WOW :tup: Glad you're here :)

Some of my questions:

As a psychologist, do you think or hope that psychology can bring piece to mankind? Why? Why not?

Do you consider psychology a modern kind of religion? Or science? or both? or anything else [what then?], Why? why not?

What is the meaning of life taught by the school of psychology? Do you think it is valid? Why? why not?

What is your idea about metaphysics? Do you think psyche presented in psychology as some scientific component is another name for the soul presented by religions?
I am going to treat these questions as a block because while I trained as a psych that was a while back. Psychology is nothing more or less than the study of human behaviour so I am not sure you could call it a religion (though you are free to if you also call for the state to give us a tax break). In addition there is no "school of psychology" so to speak and little agreement on very much at all so it is hard to really say anything about what psychologist think. I think it is fair to say that psychology has lowered its sights considerable and rarely attempts to answer the sorts of questions you are asking anymore. Gone are the days of Freud (for which I am glad). I think if anything there are really two major approaches you really have derivatives of behaviourism (and reactions to it) which put the environment and learning front and centre then you have evo psych and other biological approaches. I think there is little doubt that both are right the fight is more over how best to integrate them. As for psyche that is Freud and long gone from mainstream psych. There is little meta-physical discussions in psych anymore (at least in relation to the conferences I attend).

What is the meaning of life from your point of view? ;)
I dont think there is any meaning of life so to speak. I get a lot of meaning out of life by my relationships with my friends and family and the connection I feel with the world around me. It is a meaning of my (and my cultural backgrounds) making. I like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Sisyphus

Do you think science and meta-science will embrace into one entity in future? why? why not?
Well maybe a Gould type non-overlapping magisteria maybe. That is treating the questions that each answers as seperate domains. Though science does have this pesky ability to shrink the world of the meta-physical.

Do you believe in god? Why? If not, why?
No because I see no evidence. :)

Do you believe in synchronicity? Why? Why not?
I know nothing at all about it.

Do you think the author of "The Secret" is a charlatan? Why? why not?
Largely narcissistic (or to be nicer individualistic) bs. I always wonder why people in those videos are so busy asking the universe for a new pony and never asking for the end of poverty.

How many articles have you published so far? How many other acceptances have you got?
I am at a little over 20 articles that are either published or accepted.

Thanks for the interesting questions!!!
 
#40
Thank you for the prompt response :)

Congratulations again for the other aspect of your success, your numerous articles :) I really enjoy hearing about it

Considering your clear sharpness, do you know what is your IQ score? :)

If life doesn't have a particular meaning, what might be its purpose in your opinion? [well I think that Camus book tells about your idea on the purpose of life: possibly nothing except to struggle without any goals - but your life style indicates that you are actually full of purpose and rich goals :) ]

No because I see no evidence.
As someone quite familiar with logical thinking and statistics, don't you agree that failure to find evidence does not mean the absence of evidence? Maybe our test power is too low? :)