Aaron Fisher
@aaronjfisher.bsky.social
4.4K followers 690 following 2K posts
Associate Professor of Psychology | University of California, Berkeley. Interested in Idiographic Science, Group-to-Individual Generalizability, and Personalization. EMA, time series, physiology, methods and statistics.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Aaron Fisher
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Oops. It bounced back. I must have an old email for you. DM me your email and I resend.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Excited that this one is live and doubly excited that I've already been able to replicate the majority of the findings in NESARC wave 1 (GAD & MDD) and wave 2 (PTSD).

If anyone knows of any publicly available data sets with *DSM-5* PTSD, please let me know!!
psycnet.apa.org/record/2026-...
APA PsycNet
psycnet.apa.org
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
I require this for my folks. Code and data.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Let's see a mimeograph of those hand calculations!
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
And if there is anyone reading this and feeling like they don't have to requisite skill to share their code and show their work, I'd be more than happy to help.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
But as Kevin said, SPSS can output syntax. The "SPSS is bad" convo is separate from the "show your work" convo, and the latter is critical. Folks are so quick to take offense to "soft science" accusations, but this one reason why our science is soft AF. It's time to level up.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
I mean, I still don't understand. Clearly I'm either too old or not "online" enough. But if it's intentional antagonization, that's some fucking bullshit. Of all the crap we have to deal with in this stupid epoch of ours, the explosion of intentional antagonization of vulnerable people is the worst.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
There is no excuse. Is this science? Or is it kindergarten arts and crafts? Seriously. You can't show your work?? GTFO.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Someone please explain to me why people are angry that the CEO of Blue Sky is posting about waffles.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Great googly moogly!! I just submitted a review where I recommended reject. Went and checked what the other reviewers thought and R1 recommended 'accept with minor revisions'. I am just so confused right now.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Where does one submit a methodological comment? Like, not a new method, just a "hey, have we thought about this?" kind of thing?
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Going to the gym is not antithetical to going to the library. Fitness is a key element of longevity and sound mental health.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
A bit nitpicky, but wouldn't the 0/1 variant be the more common model in our field?
Reposted by Aaron Fisher
Reposted by Aaron Fisher
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
I do. This is a major focus of my research at the moment. I will send you some stuff in a couple of hours (currently out and about). Thank you!!
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
Perhaps. Again, I'm not super talented with coding. I would need different routines to build them out and then populate them. If you have any suggestions, that would be great!
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
I'm *sure* that there are more efficient ways to do what I'm doing. I am but a humble hack coder in all the worst meanings of the word hack.
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
In this case every combination is unique. These are the 131,071 possible combinations of DSM-IV PTSD symptoms. FWIW, a later step is to reduce these to a much smaller set of minimally sufficient sets as a function of clinical benchmarks (distress, impairment).
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
I bought a forever license when I got hired at Berkeley in 2013, but I've never used the program! Do you really think this stuff would move faster in Stata?
aaronjfisher.bsky.social
It takes a list of set strings and populates them as dichotomous vars into a data frame. The set elements correspond to existing vars in the data frame and as it populates the new vars, it checks the presence/absence of the set elements. If all are present, the new variable gets a 1, else 0.