title: Improving training in methodology enriches the science of psychology.
abstract: Replies to the comment Ramifications of increased training in quantitative methodology by Herbet Zimiles on the current authors original article "Doctoral training in statistics, measurement, and methodology in psychology: Replication and extension of Aiken, West, Sechrest, and Reno's (1990) survey of PhD programs in North America". The current authors state that in their recent article, they reported the results of an extensive survey of quantitative training in all PhD programs in North America. They compared these results with those of a similar survey conducted 12 years earlier (Aiken, West, Sechrest, & Reno, 1990), and raised issues for the future methodological training of substantive and quantitative researchers in psychology. The authors then respond to Zimiles three questions.
authors.affiliation: Arizona State University.
authors.forename: Leona S
authors.initials: LS
authors.lastname: Aiken
authors.forename: Stephen G
authors.initials: SG
authors.lastname: West
authors.forename: Roger E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Millsap
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000379:methods; D003479:Curriculum; D003625:Data Collection / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D004503:Education, Medical, Graduate / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D011584:Psychology / Q000193:education* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D012107:Research Design / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013223:Statistics as Topic / Q000193:education* / Q000379:methods