Invitation to be a co-author on a caravan article on Subjective Wellbeing (SWB). Can we find some consensus about SWB, a keyword with thousands of citations, but a word with no scientific meaning? Here is a draft. Comment, contribute and get co-authorship. replicationindex.com/2025/04/17/w...
I read it and it fails to distinguish between abuse, incompetent use, and competent use of AI. Teach people how to use it, don't say using it, is cheating. Really shallow line of argument.
Indeed. I mean, I like human intelligence, but I take artificial intelligence over human stupidity any day, just I would rather have artificial vanilla flavor than the smell of real shit. replicationindex.com/2025/10/04/i...
Shit, we need more than one study for JPSP. No problem. Study 1, 43 male participants, Study 2, 41 female participants. "Study 2. The experimenter, stimulus films, procedure, and apparatus were the same as in Study 1." Who says we did not do replication studies? LOL
and how do you know that the problem is limited to priming research. Your own work is also p-hacked. Have you replicated in preregistered (honest) studies?
No. The problem is to do anything scientifically meaningful in a (max.) 1 hour lab study that is relevant to understanding social processes, especially if it is just one person and a computer. Experimental social psychology is a paradigm failure.
Submit replications and reproductions from many different fields, as well as conceptual contributions. With diamond OA, open and citable peer review reports, and reproducibility checks, we push the boundaries of open and fair publishing.
Another one of those "it is not zero!!!" results. The correlation between self-esteem and depression is about r = -.6. So, do we care about a lagged effect of -.09, even if it were real. What do we do to lower depression in 2 years? Increase self-esteem now? And how?
Ok, he is wrong, but doesn't all of psychological "science" work that way. Maye start providing evidence for the absence of an effect, and don't publish weak effects and do a happy dance with p < .05.
I said this on main once but I think terror management theory is pseudoscientific evo psych nonsense, a just so story that many do not realize fell prey to the replication crisis alongside other fake psych stuff like ego depletion.
Deeply honoured to receive this award from the Academy of Sociology with my co-authors! I hope we’ll see many more replications in Sociology in the years ahead, along with preregistrations and registered reports as leading journals make more space for them.
Also, I remember doing follow up on Caspi 2003 and saw that there are actually published null results. Medicine is more honest than psychology. So, track who published?
I am working on finding publication bias in effect size meta-analysis. The standard methods are often not working, but in your case, the g x e focal tests are clear. The main reason for little bias would be multiple DV and only one p < .05 is need to publish. How many articles with no p < .05?
