Methods and Statistics in Social Sciences

share ›
‹ links

Below are the top discussions from Reddit that mention this online Coursera specialization from University of Amsterdam.

Identify interesting questions, analyze data sets, and correctly interpret results to make solid, evidence-based decisions.

Statistics Statistical Inference R Programming Qualitative Research Confidence Interval Statistical Hypothesis Testing Regression Analysis Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA)

Accessible for free. Completion certificates are offered.

Affiliate disclosure: Please use the blue and green buttons to visit Coursera if you plan on enrolling in a course. Commissions Reddsera receives from using these links will keep this site online and ad-free. Reddsera will not receive commissions if you only use course links found in the below Reddit discussions.

Taught by
Annemarie Zand Scholten
Assistant Professor
and 3 more instructors

Offered by
University of Amsterdam

This specialization includes these 5 courses.

Reddit Posts and Comments

2 posts • 48 mentions • top 11 shown below

r/statistics • post
6 points • chronotope
Where to start on my statistics journey? I could use some guidance as a lost graduate student.


Long story short I got shafted by my MA program pretty hard in terms of hirable real-life skills. I'm trying to make up for it by self-study and trolling through coursera options; [this] ( seems pretty appealing given my international background. (My MA is in International Development and has caused me a huge headache for a bucket of reasons that aren't relevant to my current question.)

I would like to move into a research or data analyst position, but I am not entirely sure where to look for these jobs, or how to become qualified/proficient. Is coursera a good place to start?


r/PublicFreakout • comment
2 points • FreeWillDoesNotExist

>> And facts show that there is no statistically significant difference in crime in concealed carry states vs other states

> we literally both agreed on this. I just think itd make for a better video if they had guns.

Okay, so this comment from you was a complete lie then. I understand what you are saying. I just wanted to check the level of self delusion and deception people like you were capable of. Well, like I said earlier, I highly recommend you take this free online course and work on admitting to yourself and others that you are wrong and just making things up to confirmation bias what your right wing information sources have mislead you to believe.

Have a nice rest of your night and work on your intellectual honesty.

r/mbti • comment
1 points • blackalyph

> Where I got the data

Data from an extremely small, self-typed sample size of effectively anonymous posters, on a single subsection of a single website that is already heavily demographically biased but can't be controlled for, and allows people to freely sign up for multiple accounts is beyond meaningless. That is not "data" in any sense of the word.

Stop performing "I AM A TI SMARTY PERSON! I'M SUCH AN INTP!!!!" bullshit. If you want to cosplay as an NT, by all means go ahead, but go actually learn something and stop masturbating yourself. Do the work, not the play.

r/gradadmissions • post
1 points • r-millz
Would Coursera be taken seriously on a PhD application?

This fall I'm applying to communications PhD programs all over the U.S. Although I have a relevant BA, 5 years' professional experience, plus an MBA, I have no research experience. So I'm searching for a way prove that I'm serious about switching to a research-based career, and one of my mentors suggested taking a communications research methods graduate seminar at a nearby college this summer.

However, in this crazy COVID world, the most practical thing I've been able to find is "Methods and Statistics in Social Sciences Specialization" on Coursera. It appears very thorough to me, culminates in a final research project with fellow learners, and provides a certificate.

Would an admissions committee find this laughable? Would it be a waste of time and money?

r/StrangeStatistics • post
0 points • wondering_runner
You idiots need to learn how to correctly interpret stats
r/AskProfessors • comment
1 points • manova

I teach statistics in a psychology department. You would not be the first student to mindlessly make it through stats without really understanding it and you will not be the last. I have graduate students that cannot remember a single thing they learned from stats.

Will you have trouble in later classes? Maybe. It would be common for a research methods class to have you conduct a small experiment and analyze the results. You may have other advanced classes that also have you collect and analyze data (though usually nothing overly advanced). You will also be given original readings from journal articles that will have results sections full of stats that you will need to have at least a basic understanding of interpreting hypothesis testing.

I think you have demonstrated that it is difficult for you to take more than about 12 hours of coursework. You need to respect this limit. See if your math center has tutorial services for statistics and utilize them during your research methods class when you get to parts talking about data analysis.

You can also do some self learning over the winter break. Check out Khan Academy:

Here is a class on Coursera:

(Probably only need the 3rd and 4th topics, and if I understand it correctly, it is free if you don't want their certificate, which is not really worth anything.)

You should be able to find more. Anything aimed at psychology, social science, education, or business should cover similar material you covered in your class. Anything aimed toward advanced math or computer science will likely cover different topics. Working on it now while it is still fresh in your mind would be best instead of waiting until summer or next fall to refresh yourself.

r/AskStatistics • comment
1 points • mr0860

I'm from a social science background and, like you, I often find myself hopelessly lost when it comes to what feels like very basic concepts in statistics. I think that's partly due to how statistics is taught in all non-mathematics disciplines - in theory we're taught how to use and evaluate quite complex statistical procedures, but with only 1-2 hours per week teaching, it's impossible for our lecturers to cover the fundamental building blocks that help us to understand what's actually going on.

Because of this, I've recently started a few MOOCs on Coursera, and I've found these massively helpful for covering research methods and statistics in far more depth than my undergraduate and postgraduate lecturers ever had time to delve into. In particular, a couple of courses I'd recommend are:

  • Methods and Statistics in Social Sciences - This is particularly focused on quantitative methods in the social sciences (including quite a bit on behavioural and self-report research) so I'm not sure if it will be directly relevant with respect to neuroimaging and cognitive neuroscience, but this gives a great introduction to research methods in general. I've actually only done the first course in this series (Quantitative Research Methods), but they're very comprehensive and well made, so I'm confident that the whole series will be useful for any researcher.
  • Probability and statistics: To p or not to p? - This one is a little bit more maths-heavy so might be a bit intimidating if you don't find that sort of material easy, but it's a good introduction to some of the core concepts in quantitative research, including some you mentioned (e.g. probability distributions). You don't really have to fully engage with or grasp the maths for it to be useful either.

In terms of textbooks, I personally use Andy Field's Discovering Statistics Using R, and find that very helpful. Field is a psychologist who is very open about his difficulties with learning statistics, and I've found it quite useful and re-assuring to learn from someone with that mindset. He's also tried writing a statistics textbook in the form of a graphic novel, An Adventure in Statistics: The Reality Enigma, so if that sounds like something that might help you, check it out.

I think a few people from a 'purer' statistics background are a bit more critical about Field's books because they're not as comprehensive as a book written by, for example, a statistics professor - and there might be some advice in there that's a little bit out-of-date or not quite correct. He also has a very hit-and-miss cheesy sense of humour, which you'll either love or find very annoying. But I think he takes the right sort of approach for helping people who aren't necessarily mathematically-inclined to dip their toes into the world of statistics.

r/PoliticalScience • comment
1 points • Rlyeh_Dispatcher

In terms of online courses or filmed lectures, unfortunately there's not too many good ones around at the POL101 level. I will, however, strongly recommend Ian Shapiro's ongoing course "Power and Politics in Today's World" at Yale (Youtube link here), which gives an astonishingly thorough introduction to Western politics since 1989.

Coursera and edX have many courses on other aspects of politics, including comparative politics (US politics, Chinese politics, etc), international relations, political theory, security/terrorism studies, and methodology. These ones are particularly "meaty", in no particular order:

These are a small sample of the kinds of courses I was able to search up in just those two MOOC platforms (and there are others, like Futurelearn, iversity, etc). There's a lot more courses if you go to those platforms and do a keyword search (for example, I barely touched on the stuff there on US constitutional law). Best of all is that you can enroll in these for free (ie sign up and watch lecture videos).

r/PublicFreakout • comment
-1 points • FreeWillDoesNotExist

This was a quote from you.

> Violence with weapons on the street doesn't happen like this is concealed carry states.

I didn't catch you admitting that was complete bullshit you made up. Was the comment where you admitted this was wrong take place somewhere else in this thread? If your last comment was more intellectual dishonesty and bullshit I highly you take this free online course and work on admitting to yourself and others that you are wrong and just making things up to confirmation bias what your right wing information sources have mislead you to believe.

Do you care to show me that comment where you changed your position?

r/PublicFreakout • comment
-3 points • FreeWillDoesNotExist

In other words your view

> Violence with weapons on the street doesn't happen like this is concealed carry states.

you completely made up and when /u/IrishinManhattan617 said

> So there are these things called facts. Facts matter. And facts show that there is no statistically significant difference in crime in concealed carry states vs other states

you wished to deflect and deceive with a wall of completely irrelevant statistics?

You then attempt to make an argument that all statistics involving looking at crime rates in specific states are irrelevant on this subject because "states don't commit crimes", hmmmm. I highly you take this free online course and work on admitting to yourself and others that you are wrong and just making things up to confirmation bias what your right wing information sources have mislead you to believe.

r/mbti • comment
-8 points • blackalyph

If you're going to flare as INTP, and you talk about "wanting to see if there's a correlation" between literally anything, have some goddamn respect for yourself and at least properly act out the type you have chosen, and use proper methodology. That means you learn some basic fucking statistics and experiment design instead of shitposting.

You are not a Ti-dom, get fucking real.