# Athena Institute's statistical evidence, and could members run their own study? **URL:** \ **Category:** Pheromone Theory & Molecules\ **Created:** [July 17, 2007, 4:19pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688 "2007-07-17T16:19:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DrSmellThis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b3f665/32.png) [@DrSmellThis](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/DrSmellThis)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2007, 2:56am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688/21 "2007-08-12T02:56:27Z")
> [@jvkohl](#): > > DrSmellThis merely offered his (perhaps unqualified) help to others who want to do their own studies, or possibly to determine what published studies are crap. That’s why I asked him if he had examined studies that others have found fault with: Cutler and Genovese, 2002 --as partially reveiwed by Winman, 2004, and Wysocki and Preti, 1998. I’d like to know more about his basis for evaluations/devaluations of others research, since my next peer-reviewed publication (unlike my reviews) may include statistical analyses. > > James V. Kohl > author/creator: The Scent of Eros Wow. I have no idea why this person went into full personal attack mode, especially in his other post. But that seems really inappropriate in this kind of forum. Perhaps moderators would consider deleting all these posts. I wouldn’t have my feelings hurt if mine were deleted too. All I was doing is what a typical psych prof (which I have been at more than one college) would do when teaching young people about research methods and design, which they often have to do: “Statistics are a neutral mathematical tool. They’re not GOOD or BAD. They’re not lies, and they’re not truths. But good studies require them to be used, and used well.” Don’t freak out, dude. This is Psych 101. Tens of thousands of psych profs have said the exact same thing. No big deal. If this guy had taken any classes whatsoever in research design, statistics; or anything in the social sciences other than maybe intro to psychology, he would have recognized exactly what I was doing. Nobody here was being discredited or criticized. I was not commenting on any particular studies, just clearing up a common misconception about research that you see in the media a lot. (e.g., “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics!”) That’s what I do on pheromone forums, mostly because I enjoy being helpful, and because it’s my proper role in society. I made it a point to let Jim know I wasn’t criticizing his witty comment. Just to clarify – and I hate to say all this but know no other way to set the record straight after that tirade – this individual claiming I am “unqualified” to offer help to forum participants about research, Mr. Kohl, is trained only as a hospital lab technician, without a bachelor’s degree in anything. He has no psychology degree, no biology degree, no chemistry degree, no statistics degree. Maybe he has a bachelor’s degree in lab tech, but I seem to remember that he has something like an associate’s degree. If mistaken, I sincerely apologize on that detail. Nothing wrong with all that. Formal education can be overrated. But he is certainly not a doctor of anything, even though lots of people have called him “doctor” in these forums and he never once corrected any of them. How ethical is that? He is a smart guy and obsessive self-promoter (in almost every post in the history of the forums) who made a quite legitimate name for himself publishing “literature reviews” (like the intro part to a research study, where you summarize the literature) and theoretical pieces. He has never designed and conducted a study, and has no training in research or statistics whatsoever, much less the social sciences. So he cannot offer a professional critique of any research, except from the narrow standpoint of facts and issues about pheromones, and certainly has no place judging someone else’s qualifications to discuss statistics, psychology; or research methods, design, and analysis. His opinions about research, psychology and statistics are similar to those of a college student in an intro class, presented with a lot more bravado. This is not a judgement. It’s just the way it is, and he forced me to say it. He knows a lot of facts about pheromones, however, and is good at processing information about pheromones, including many of the biological aspects. I have no problem with him calling himself a kind of expert on pheromones, despite the lack of formal training, because who cares? He does know a lot of facts about pheromones, and has published a lot of informative literature review articles on pheromones, some with theoretical importance. If everyone could give credit where credit is due, the world would be a better place. (But calling himself a “researcher” is a bit sketchy, by formal standards. And processing blood samples or whatever in a hospital does not make you a “clinical laboratory scientist”, like he claims. It makes you a lab tech, period. It’s not ethically OK to say that in the sciences. These are terms reserved for people who conduct studies and have an advanced degree.) Myself? I have never claimed to be an expert on pheromomes in the professional sense. I’m not a professional pheromone expert like Regina Maiworm, who is paid to design studies about pheromones. I am professionally conversant about them, and that has been my only claim. The evidence supporting this modest claim is my 6000 or so posts on pheromones in these forums. That is all, and that’s enough for me. I could sit down to dinner with Regina Maiworm or some other prominent pheromone “researcher” (a term that in all sciences means someone who conducts studies, not just collect and process information, just like the term “scientist”), hold my own in a conversation about [pheromone research](https://pheromonelabs.com/) and science, and contribute some insights. I’m a semi-professional perfumer with a PhD in psychology, and developed an interest in the topic maybe fifteen years ago. So I know more than most science laypeople, and have read most of the major human pheromone research literature (there’s really not that much of it in the grand scheme of the sciences), when I can find time. No biggie. However, I am absolutely professionally trained in psychology, statistics and research methods. In order to get my PhD in psychology I had to take maybe twenty graduate level classes in statistics, research methods and design, in addition to practical experience designing, critiquing, and conducting studies. My doctoral advisor was a prominent national figure in research methods and design. On my committe also sat one of the prominent experts on statistics in all of the social sciences; someone with major textbooks on multivariate analysis of variance, structural equations, etc. If I didn’t get really proficient in those areas I never would have earned the doctoral degree. They would have eaten me for breakfast. So yeah, I’m more than qualified to criticize the research methodology (including statistical methods) of pheromone studies (or any other studies in the human sciences), and totally qualified to teach basic principles of research and statistical analysis to social science students. I can take any study, from top to bottom, and turn it inside out, just like a lot of people in any major university psych department. These are all part and parcel of teaching psychology, which I have professionally on the university level. That doesn’t make me anything special, just another boring psych prof. I’m not trying to brag about anything, certainly, just to say the minimum necessary to fairly respond to a personal attack from an internet troll. Why “troll”? This guy has a history of causing problems and chasing people away from the other forum by trumpeting his “expert” status in every single post (no reputable scientist ever does anything comparable to this, only someone with deep insecurities and/or promotion agenda) and browbeating people, like he did on page one of this thread. His distinctly unscientific M.O., again displayed on p. 1 of this thread, is to appeal to authority rather than evidence when discussing truth claims, and to put down others’ “authority” (“how many peer reviewed articles blah blah do you have?” You’re not an insider like me", etc.) rather than the substance in someone’s statement. Bruce, the owner of the other site, would be the first to tell you all this, and has indeed courageously told us that in the public forum, even though his livelihood depends on selling this person’s product. That should tell you something. You can witness some of this in action here: [http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17357](http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17357) For the record, I have no problem with his products whatsover, and encourage people to buy them, if they want, from the other site. Scent of Eros is a fine product. The guy deserves to make a living, and so does Bruce. And yeah, I’d be happy to help anyone with those kinds of topics whenever they come up, as I do over on Love-Scent. For example, if somebody posts a link to a study on human sexuality or pheromones they don’t understand, I’d be happy to help them understand the pluses and minuses of it, because you really can’t do that without some training and skill. Research is typically misunderstood by the media. People can take that help for what it is; and judge it on its own merits, rather than any claims of authority. But frankly, I’m not going to change my behavior just because some grandiose tool doesn’t like me (presumably, for bursting his oppressive ego bubble a few times. He should instead thank me). ---
**Author:** ![smn1234](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/smn1234/32/2430_2.png) [@smn1234](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/smn1234)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2007, 2:32am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688/22 "2007-08-13T02:32:08Z")
So, could someone summarize what the athena institute is…? I feel like I’m in a forest without a map ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 5:00am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688/23 "2007-08-14T05:00:32Z")
> [@DrSmellThis](#): > > Nobody here was being discredited or criticized. What was the intent of your comment on “crap” being published? My intent was to find out a bit more about your background, and the “help” you were offering? My scientific approach is more often considered “hard” science, compared to what I think is your “soft” science. Shouldn’t people at least know a little about our very different scientific approaches? Some people may think any soft science publications are crap, others may think the hard science publications are crap (for overstating the importance of their findings, for example). PE Meehl has published several papers on the need to understand differences that may be relevant to Forum discussions–and many of his works are available on line. Each time I’ve asked about your credentials, qualifications, expertise, anonymity, you’ve come back with an attack. It was nice to see that you provided more information about yourself, after your attack. I hope that others aren’t easily led by your claim that my ego drives my comments–especially comments directed to you. Meanwhile, as with every anonymous member, you can say whatever you want about anything --even attack me. But I would rather you not play the role of the injured party. It’s even more anoying to me when you make false claims about my lack of credentials. James V. Kohl Author/creator: The Scent of Eros ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2007, 6:50pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688/24 "2007-08-15T18:50:55Z")
> [@DrSmellThis](#): > > Mr. Kohl, is trained only as a hospital lab technician,… He has never designed and conducted a study, and has no training in research or statistics whatsoever, much less the social sciences. (… calling himself a “researcher” is a bit sketchy, by formal standards. And processing blood samples or whatever in a hospital does not make you a “clinical laboratory scientist”, like he claims. It makes you a lab tech, period. It’s not ethically OK to say that in the sciences. These are terms reserved for people who conduct studies and have an advanced degree.) I will stand by my introduction: [Introduction: James V. Kohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/introduction-james-v-kohl/3912) and thank others for welcoming me to this Forum. More recently, I posted that I received an award for the author(s) of the best **social science** article, chapter, or book published during the previous year… You can verify my **Clinical Laboratory Scientist** credentials via links from my introduction: either to the [National Credentialing Agency for Laboratory Personnel](http://www.nca-info.org/), or to the [American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science](http://www.ascls.org/), You can verify my use of " **Researcher"** by examining the membership requirements for the [Society for Neuroscience.](http://www.sfn.org/) “All applicants… must be sponsored by two regular or emeritus members of the Society and must submit a curriculum vitae and bibliography with the application form.” Sponsors attest that applicants have made a significant contribution to the field (e.g., via research). I helped to design several **research** studies. A student **researcher** and I presented the most recent **research** results in April 2007 at the [Association for Chemoreception Sciences](http://www.achems.org/) annual meeting. > [@DrSmellThis](#): > > This guy has a history of causing problems and chasing people away from the other forum by trumpeting his “expert” status in every single post… Perhaps others will more fully consider who is causing the problems. > [@DrSmellThis](#): > > … he cannot offer a professional critique of any research, except from the narrow standpoint of facts and issues about pheromones… I hope to discuss facts and issues about pheromones with other members of this Forum. Discussions would be easier for me if defamatory comments about my credentials and expertise were either not anonymously made, or not made at all. James V. Kohl `http://www.pheromones.com` ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2007, 2:58am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688/25 "2007-08-24T02:58:17Z")
> [@jvkohl](#): > > Perhaps others will more fully consider who is causing the problems. Does anyone else wonder what happened to my critic: DrSmellThis, or think I was being too critical of him? James V. Kohl author/creator: The Scent of Eros [Previous page](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/athena-institutes-statistical-evidence-and-could-members-run-their-own-study/4688.md?page=1)