Welcome to NUHome!

NUHome – Photograph By Kalman Zabarsky

The NUHome Laboratory is behavioral monitoring assessment and intervention. Located on the 4th floor of Richards Hall at 360 Huntington Avenue, the NUHome Lab is 600 square foot enclosed space architected as a one bedroom apartment with an adjacent computer control room. It is equipped with a full spectrum of sensors, including set of 2D and 3D cameras, passive infrared sensors, contact switches, microphones, etc., that are used to make as accurate assessment of the participants’ actual behaviors during testing the systems to be deployed in a number of studies.

The Consortium opened NUHome in March 2017 as a key feature of Northeastern University’s Healthcare Hackathon, an annual event hosted by the Nursing Innovation program. Since then, it has been featured on the cover of Bouve College’s Vital Signs magazine and most recently on WGBH Greater Boston news. We look forward to sharing this incredible resource with the greater NU community and beyond.

CTPC welcomes Iman Khaghani Far!

In June 2016, CTPC welcomed its first postdoctoral research associate, Iman Khaghani Far. Iman was a visiting scholar with CTPC in Fall 2015 and finished his PhD in Human Computer Interaction under mentor Fabio Casati at the University of Trento, Italy in March 2016. He is helping CTPC to refine and expand its health coaching platform through continued software development and data analysis. Welcome, Iman!

Open Science Collaboration finds that only 39% of psychology studies are reproducible

The August 28th issue of Science published an article by the Open Science Collaboration which found that the results of only 39% of psychology studies were reproducible. CTPC member Misha Pavel is one of 270 authors on this paper.


Reproducibility is a defining feature of science, but the extent to which it characterizes current research is unknown. We conducted replications of 100 experimental and correlational studies published in three psychology journals using high-powered designs and original materials when available. Replication effects were half the magnitude of original effects, representing a substantial decline. Ninety-seven percent of original studies had statistically significant results. Thirty-six percent of replications had statistically significant results; 47% of original effect sizes were in the 95% confidence interval of the replication effect size; 39% of effects were subjectively rated to have replicated the original result; and if no bias in original results is assumed, combining original and replication results left 68% with statistically significant effects. Correlational tests suggest that replication success was better predicted by the strength of original evidence than by characteristics of the original and replication teams.

Read the full article:

Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science 28 August 2015: Vol. 349 no. 6251
DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716

See the in-depth companion piece by John Bohannon:

Bohannon, J. Many psychology papers fail the replication test. Science 28 August 2015: Vol. 349 no. 6251 pp. 910-911
DOI: 10.1126/science.349.6251.910.