Bastian Jaeger
@bxjaeger.bsky.social
Assistant Professor @ Tilburg University 🇳🇱
❤️🧠Moral Psychology & Altruism
🌚🌝First impressions & Social biases
🔬📊Meta-science
❤️🧠Moral Psychology & Altruism
🌚🌝First impressions & Social biases
🔬📊Meta-science
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
🚨 New working paper!
How well do people predict the results of studies?
@sdellavi.bsky.social and I leverage data from the first 100 studies to have been posted on the SSPP, containing 1,482 key questions, on which over 50,000 forecasts were placed. Some surprising results below.... 🧵👇
How well do people predict the results of studies?
@sdellavi.bsky.social and I leverage data from the first 100 studies to have been posted on the SSPP, containing 1,482 key questions, on which over 50,000 forecasts were placed. Some surprising results below.... 🧵👇
November 24, 2025 at 3:43 PM
🚨 New working paper!
How well do people predict the results of studies?
@sdellavi.bsky.social and I leverage data from the first 100 studies to have been posted on the SSPP, containing 1,482 key questions, on which over 50,000 forecasts were placed. Some surprising results below.... 🧵👇
How well do people predict the results of studies?
@sdellavi.bsky.social and I leverage data from the first 100 studies to have been posted on the SSPP, containing 1,482 key questions, on which over 50,000 forecasts were placed. Some surprising results below.... 🧵👇
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
All of the teams did better than randomly selecting scores and none of the teams did better than selecting 0.5 as a constant score.
Round 2 is getting started. If you think you can do better, join! Prizes: $15k for 1st, $12k for 2nd, $6,750 for 3rd.
More info: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Round 2 is getting started. If you think you can do better, join! Prizes: $15k for 1st, $12k for 2nd, $6,750 for 3rd.
More info: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Predicting Replicability Challenge: Round 1 Results and Round 2 Opportunity
The Center for Open Science (COS) launched a public competition in early 2025 to investigate automated assessments of replicability of research claims. Results of the first round are available, along ...
www.cos.io
November 24, 2025 at 5:30 PM
All of the teams did better than randomly selecting scores and none of the teams did better than selecting 0.5 as a constant score.
Round 2 is getting started. If you think you can do better, join! Prizes: $15k for 1st, $12k for 2nd, $6,750 for 3rd.
More info: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Round 2 is getting started. If you think you can do better, join! Prizes: $15k for 1st, $12k for 2nd, $6,750 for 3rd.
More info: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Round 1 results of our predicting replicability challenge are released!
The Challenge capitalizes on interest in using AI methods to do scientific tasks. Ten teams tried to predict replication outcomes from unreleased SCORE findings.
Results? Not so hot!
Post: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
The Challenge capitalizes on interest in using AI methods to do scientific tasks. Ten teams tried to predict replication outcomes from unreleased SCORE findings.
Results? Not so hot!
Post: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
November 24, 2025 at 5:30 PM
Round 1 results of our predicting replicability challenge are released!
The Challenge capitalizes on interest in using AI methods to do scientific tasks. Ten teams tried to predict replication outcomes from unreleased SCORE findings.
Results? Not so hot!
Post: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
The Challenge capitalizes on interest in using AI methods to do scientific tasks. Ten teams tried to predict replication outcomes from unreleased SCORE findings.
Results? Not so hot!
Post: www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
@sjdm-tweets.bsky.social
Why does "1-in-X" (e.g., 1 in 50 vs. 20 in 1000) feel riskier? The answer: It's the availability heuristic! We found that the 1-in-X ratio is easier to mentally visualize and recall examples for.
Risk Communication Poster at #SJDM2025 in Denver, Colorado!
Why does "1-in-X" (e.g., 1 in 50 vs. 20 in 1000) feel riskier? The answer: It's the availability heuristic! We found that the 1-in-X ratio is easier to mentally visualize and recall examples for.
Risk Communication Poster at #SJDM2025 in Denver, Colorado!
November 23, 2025 at 1:25 AM
@sjdm-tweets.bsky.social
Why does "1-in-X" (e.g., 1 in 50 vs. 20 in 1000) feel riskier? The answer: It's the availability heuristic! We found that the 1-in-X ratio is easier to mentally visualize and recall examples for.
Risk Communication Poster at #SJDM2025 in Denver, Colorado!
Why does "1-in-X" (e.g., 1 in 50 vs. 20 in 1000) feel riskier? The answer: It's the availability heuristic! We found that the 1-in-X ratio is easier to mentally visualize and recall examples for.
Risk Communication Poster at #SJDM2025 in Denver, Colorado!
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
We @opensciencenl.bsky.social proudly present the new work programme for 2026–2027. 13 funding instruments to strengthen #openscience in the Netherlands.
Structured around 5 themes:
🔹infrastructure
🔹capacity
🔹communities
🔹incentives
🔹monitoring
www.openscience.nl/en/news/work...
Structured around 5 themes:
🔹infrastructure
🔹capacity
🔹communities
🔹incentives
🔹monitoring
www.openscience.nl/en/news/work...
Work programme 2026-2027: the Netherlands takes the next step towards open science | Open Science NL
With its second work programme, Open Science NL takes another major step towards making open science the norm in the Netherlands. On 14 November, the Steering Board approved the programme for 2026 and 2027. It outlines thirteen funding instruments covering the full spectrum of open science, ranging from citizen science hubs, AI, replication studies, to open science infrastructure.
www.openscience.nl
November 20, 2025 at 12:00 PM
We @opensciencenl.bsky.social proudly present the new work programme for 2026–2027. 13 funding instruments to strengthen #openscience in the Netherlands.
Structured around 5 themes:
🔹infrastructure
🔹capacity
🔹communities
🔹incentives
🔹monitoring
www.openscience.nl/en/news/work...
Structured around 5 themes:
🔹infrastructure
🔹capacity
🔹communities
🔹incentives
🔹monitoring
www.openscience.nl/en/news/work...
It's easy to produce spurious findings:
A meaningless score based on irrelevant evaluations (“My relationship has very good Saturn”) was moderately related to common relationship measures (satisfaction, commitment) & predicted those measures 3 weeks later
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
A meaningless score based on irrelevant evaluations (“My relationship has very good Saturn”) was moderately related to common relationship measures (satisfaction, commitment) & predicted those measures 3 weeks later
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
November 19, 2025 at 1:59 PM
It's easy to produce spurious findings:
A meaningless score based on irrelevant evaluations (“My relationship has very good Saturn”) was moderately related to common relationship measures (satisfaction, commitment) & predicted those measures 3 weeks later
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
A meaningless score based on irrelevant evaluations (“My relationship has very good Saturn”) was moderately related to common relationship measures (satisfaction, commitment) & predicted those measures 3 weeks later
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
This is a very interesting paper but the empirical evidence presented for an increase in connectivity (in their Fig. 1E) is rather problematic. A little thread 👇(1/7):
Is it possible that social media, which promised to connect the world, instead increased polarization? A model of human social dynamics predicts a sharp transition into a polarized state above a certain threshold of social connectivity. In PNAS: https://ow.ly/Gym350XnNW8
November 18, 2025 at 11:18 AM
This is a very interesting paper but the empirical evidence presented for an increase in connectivity (in their Fig. 1E) is rather problematic. A little thread 👇(1/7):
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
The new journal EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY will soon be accepting submissions!
The journal's homepage is now live: journals.ub.uni-koeln.de/index.php/xphi
We will soon also be found under xphi.eu.
Accepting submissions in about 2 weeks.
We will soon also be found under xphi.eu.
Accepting submissions in about 2 weeks.
Experimental Philosophy
journals.ub.uni-koeln.de
November 13, 2025 at 7:43 PM
The new journal EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY will soon be accepting submissions!
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
So why hasn’t this happened yet? 🤷♀️
Because for-profit publishers have distorted Open Access so thoroughly that many authors now believe their only OA option is to pay astronomical APCs.
And we ask researchers to publish OA… while rewarding prestige controlled by the same oligopoly. 5/n
Because for-profit publishers have distorted Open Access so thoroughly that many authors now believe their only OA option is to pay astronomical APCs.
And we ask researchers to publish OA… while rewarding prestige controlled by the same oligopoly. 5/n
November 13, 2025 at 8:17 PM
So why hasn’t this happened yet? 🤷♀️
Because for-profit publishers have distorted Open Access so thoroughly that many authors now believe their only OA option is to pay astronomical APCs.
And we ask researchers to publish OA… while rewarding prestige controlled by the same oligopoly. 5/n
Because for-profit publishers have distorted Open Access so thoroughly that many authors now believe their only OA option is to pay astronomical APCs.
And we ask researchers to publish OA… while rewarding prestige controlled by the same oligopoly. 5/n
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Why? 🤑
In just the last 5 years, 4 publishers made $US 41 billion in revenue and $14.7B in profit - money that largely comes from taxpayer-funded research budgets.
For context: the entire 2024 NSF budget was $9B USD.
@elsevierconnect.bsky.social made $3.9B that year at a 38% profit margin. 2/n
In just the last 5 years, 4 publishers made $US 41 billion in revenue and $14.7B in profit - money that largely comes from taxpayer-funded research budgets.
For context: the entire 2024 NSF budget was $9B USD.
@elsevierconnect.bsky.social made $3.9B that year at a 38% profit margin. 2/n
November 13, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Why? 🤑
In just the last 5 years, 4 publishers made $US 41 billion in revenue and $14.7B in profit - money that largely comes from taxpayer-funded research budgets.
For context: the entire 2024 NSF budget was $9B USD.
@elsevierconnect.bsky.social made $3.9B that year at a 38% profit margin. 2/n
In just the last 5 years, 4 publishers made $US 41 billion in revenue and $14.7B in profit - money that largely comes from taxpayer-funded research budgets.
For context: the entire 2024 NSF budget was $9B USD.
@elsevierconnect.bsky.social made $3.9B that year at a 38% profit margin. 2/n
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Over the past months (and at least 11 versions!), I was lucky to work with 11 amazing colleagues on a call to action to reform academic publishing.
Not another declaration, but an appeal to our powerful friends, research funders & institutions, to Stop the Drain of Scientific Publishing. 1/n
Not another declaration, but an appeal to our powerful friends, research funders & institutions, to Stop the Drain of Scientific Publishing. 1/n
November 13, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Over the past months (and at least 11 versions!), I was lucky to work with 11 amazing colleagues on a call to action to reform academic publishing.
Not another declaration, but an appeal to our powerful friends, research funders & institutions, to Stop the Drain of Scientific Publishing. 1/n
Not another declaration, but an appeal to our powerful friends, research funders & institutions, to Stop the Drain of Scientific Publishing. 1/n
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
1/4
Policymakers often do listen to publics when formulating preferences on nuclear weapon use. Our #OpenAccess article provides first-of-kind evidence about when publics enable, constrain, or are less influential. @ejisbisa.bsky.social @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org
Link: doi.org/10.1017/eis....
Policymakers often do listen to publics when formulating preferences on nuclear weapon use. Our #OpenAccess article provides first-of-kind evidence about when publics enable, constrain, or are less influential. @ejisbisa.bsky.social @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org
Link: doi.org/10.1017/eis....
November 12, 2025 at 2:45 PM
1/4
Policymakers often do listen to publics when formulating preferences on nuclear weapon use. Our #OpenAccess article provides first-of-kind evidence about when publics enable, constrain, or are less influential. @ejisbisa.bsky.social @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org
Link: doi.org/10.1017/eis....
Policymakers often do listen to publics when formulating preferences on nuclear weapon use. Our #OpenAccess article provides first-of-kind evidence about when publics enable, constrain, or are less influential. @ejisbisa.bsky.social @cambup-polsci.cambridge.org
Link: doi.org/10.1017/eis....
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
~40% of psyarxiv preprints contain links to open data in 2025 vs (e.g.) ~10% in 2019 (although in the latter case people mostly did not report this metadata): vuorre.com/psyarxiv-das...
November 12, 2025 at 2:50 PM
~40% of psyarxiv preprints contain links to open data in 2025 vs (e.g.) ~10% in 2019 (although in the latter case people mostly did not report this metadata): vuorre.com/psyarxiv-das...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Results from study of mental health in 92 countries (n>53,000): People are not doing well.
- U-shape for age is gone: Young adults lowest health, highest illness
- Education still matters (a lot)
- 45% of older people live alone
- Hybrid work > 100% remote or in-person
Preprint: osf.io/3jyda_v1
- U-shape for age is gone: Young adults lowest health, highest illness
- Education still matters (a lot)
- 45% of older people live alone
- Hybrid work > 100% remote or in-person
Preprint: osf.io/3jyda_v1
November 12, 2025 at 12:47 PM
Results from study of mental health in 92 countries (n>53,000): People are not doing well.
- U-shape for age is gone: Young adults lowest health, highest illness
- Education still matters (a lot)
- 45% of older people live alone
- Hybrid work > 100% remote or in-person
Preprint: osf.io/3jyda_v1
- U-shape for age is gone: Young adults lowest health, highest illness
- Education still matters (a lot)
- 45% of older people live alone
- Hybrid work > 100% remote or in-person
Preprint: osf.io/3jyda_v1
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
I hate demand characteristics, but many other pre-registered experiments *have* found the effect.
We discuss in this meta:
online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
We discuss in this meta:
online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
November 12, 2025 at 6:41 PM
I hate demand characteristics, but many other pre-registered experiments *have* found the effect.
We discuss in this meta:
online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
We discuss in this meta:
online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
Three preregistered experiments with prolific participants (N = 2,254) found no evidence for experimenter demand effects
osf.io/preprints/ps...
osf.io/preprints/ps...
November 12, 2025 at 1:20 PM
Three preregistered experiments with prolific participants (N = 2,254) found no evidence for experimenter demand effects
osf.io/preprints/ps...
osf.io/preprints/ps...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Prediction: Social psychologists will still insist that the book's thesis is valid, thereby ironically validating its thesis
Ok, just wow. If the content of this article is right, this is depressing. We're slowly reaching the point where ~100% of what I was taught in Social Psych was either innocently wrong or plainly frauded
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1...
Debunking “When Prophecy Fails”
In 1954, Dorothy Martin predicted an apocalyptic flood and promised her followers rescue by flying saucers. When neither arrived, she recanted, her group dissolved, and efforts to proselytize ceased....
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
November 6, 2025 at 4:17 AM
Prediction: Social psychologists will still insist that the book's thesis is valid, thereby ironically validating its thesis
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
I’ve spent the last 8 years(!) working from the position that HiTOP relies too much on analyses of traditional diagnoses, baking in limitations of the DSM, and that we need to move to symptom-level analyses to fix it
It turns out that rebuilding HiTOP from the ground up doesn’t change much 💀
1/
It turns out that rebuilding HiTOP from the ground up doesn’t change much 💀
1/
November 4, 2025 at 8:27 PM
I’ve spent the last 8 years(!) working from the position that HiTOP relies too much on analyses of traditional diagnoses, baking in limitations of the DSM, and that we need to move to symptom-level analyses to fix it
It turns out that rebuilding HiTOP from the ground up doesn’t change much 💀
1/
It turns out that rebuilding HiTOP from the ground up doesn’t change much 💀
1/
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
🎉 New paper accepted at JPSP: ASC!
Verena Heidrich, Felicitas Flade & I ask:
When people meet others, which social lens do they use — age, gender, race?
Our paper: “Face the Difference: Meta-contrast as an Affordance to Spontaneous Social Categorization.”
osf.io/preprints/ps...
Verena Heidrich, Felicitas Flade & I ask:
When people meet others, which social lens do they use — age, gender, race?
Our paper: “Face the Difference: Meta-contrast as an Affordance to Spontaneous Social Categorization.”
osf.io/preprints/ps...
OSF
osf.io
November 5, 2025 at 7:01 AM
🎉 New paper accepted at JPSP: ASC!
Verena Heidrich, Felicitas Flade & I ask:
When people meet others, which social lens do they use — age, gender, race?
Our paper: “Face the Difference: Meta-contrast as an Affordance to Spontaneous Social Categorization.”
osf.io/preprints/ps...
Verena Heidrich, Felicitas Flade & I ask:
When people meet others, which social lens do they use — age, gender, race?
Our paper: “Face the Difference: Meta-contrast as an Affordance to Spontaneous Social Categorization.”
osf.io/preprints/ps...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Excellent chimeric face image showing off a left visual field bias for face processing - this image will tend to look more like John Travolta to observers, but the next one (see following post in this thread)... <1/2>
Respond with the same actor as a hero and villain.
November 4, 2025 at 9:18 PM
Excellent chimeric face image showing off a left visual field bias for face processing - this image will tend to look more like John Travolta to observers, but the next one (see following post in this thread)... <1/2>
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Just bumping this -- I'll be recruiting a new graduate student this cycle, to start in fall 2026. So will my colleagues Karen Gasper and Reg Adams. I'm currently the area coordinator. Reach out if you have questions about Penn State Social Psychology -- WE ARE!
Although most of my photos right now are of State College autumn, here's Happy Valley from the sky this August. It was awe-inspiring to get this view.
So, come join us here! I'll be recruiting a graduate student to the Empathy & Moral Psychology (EMP) Lab during this cycle, to start in fall 2026.
So, come join us here! I'll be recruiting a graduate student to the Empathy & Moral Psychology (EMP) Lab during this cycle, to start in fall 2026.
November 4, 2025 at 2:38 PM
Just bumping this -- I'll be recruiting a new graduate student this cycle, to start in fall 2026. So will my colleagues Karen Gasper and Reg Adams. I'm currently the area coordinator. Reach out if you have questions about Penn State Social Psychology -- WE ARE!
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
✈️🥩♻️ How accurately do people perceive the #climate impact of different lifestyles — and how do those perceptions relate to their own behavior and policy preferences?
Our new study investigated exactly this in China, Germany, and the US.🧵
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Our new study investigated exactly this in China, Germany, and the US.🧵
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Climate impact perceptions and associations with reported behaviors and policy support in three countries
To accelerate climate change mitigation, substantial lifestyle changes and more ambitious climate policies are urgently needed. However, realizing beh…
www.sciencedirect.com
November 4, 2025 at 2:40 PM
✈️🥩♻️ How accurately do people perceive the #climate impact of different lifestyles — and how do those perceptions relate to their own behavior and policy preferences?
Our new study investigated exactly this in China, Germany, and the US.🧵
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Our new study investigated exactly this in China, Germany, and the US.🧵
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
🐶New preprint! 🐶 co-led by Ayça Akkuş
w/ @drcharlie.bsky.social & Brock Bastian
We explore cultural and individual differences in the hierarchy of moral concern in a sample of >6500 participants from 41 cultural groups.
osf.io/preprints/ps...
w/ @drcharlie.bsky.social & Brock Bastian
We explore cultural and individual differences in the hierarchy of moral concern in a sample of >6500 participants from 41 cultural groups.
osf.io/preprints/ps...
November 4, 2025 at 1:44 PM
🐶New preprint! 🐶 co-led by Ayça Akkuş
w/ @drcharlie.bsky.social & Brock Bastian
We explore cultural and individual differences in the hierarchy of moral concern in a sample of >6500 participants from 41 cultural groups.
osf.io/preprints/ps...
w/ @drcharlie.bsky.social & Brock Bastian
We explore cultural and individual differences in the hierarchy of moral concern in a sample of >6500 participants from 41 cultural groups.
osf.io/preprints/ps...
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
The package formerly known as papercheck has changed its name to metacheck! We're checking more than just papers, with functions to assess OSF projects, github repos, and AsPredicted pre-registrations, with more being developed all the time.
scienceverse.github.io/metacheck/
scienceverse.github.io/metacheck/
Check Research Outputs for Best Practices
A modular, extendable system for automatically checking research outputs for best practices using text search, R code, and/or (optional) LLM queries.
scienceverse.github.io
November 3, 2025 at 4:20 PM
The package formerly known as papercheck has changed its name to metacheck! We're checking more than just papers, with functions to assess OSF projects, github repos, and AsPredicted pre-registrations, with more being developed all the time.
scienceverse.github.io/metacheck/
scienceverse.github.io/metacheck/
Reposted by Bastian Jaeger
Prayer's effects on health have been studied many times.
Small studies initially reported some benefit, but more rigorous studies found null or even harmful effects.
In sum, prayer seemed ineffective, recommending focus on more promising interventions: doi.org/10.1002/1465...
Small studies initially reported some benefit, but more rigorous studies found null or even harmful effects.
In sum, prayer seemed ineffective, recommending focus on more promising interventions: doi.org/10.1002/1465...
November 3, 2025 at 12:22 PM
Prayer's effects on health have been studied many times.
Small studies initially reported some benefit, but more rigorous studies found null or even harmful effects.
In sum, prayer seemed ineffective, recommending focus on more promising interventions: doi.org/10.1002/1465...
Small studies initially reported some benefit, but more rigorous studies found null or even harmful effects.
In sum, prayer seemed ineffective, recommending focus on more promising interventions: doi.org/10.1002/1465...