Samantha Joel
@datingdecisions.bsky.social
1.5K followers 750 following 210 posts
Social psychologist, relationships enthusiast, Associate Prof at Western University 🇨🇦.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Samantha Joel
drzilwhite.bsky.social
If a grad or undergrad researcher in my lab said to me, "We are doing the studies to make the proof", I would have them retake research methods course and/or a philosophy of science course.
atrupar.com
RFK Jr on Tylenol and autism: "It is not proof. We're doing the studies to make the proof."
Reposted by Samantha Joel
datingdecisions.bsky.social
Salary will be between $1 and $1,000,000, commensurate with experience.
datingdecisions.bsky.social
Open rank!
Are you gonna apply, Lorne? 😉
Reposted by Samantha Joel
lornejcampbell.bsky.social
New ad for an open rank position in Psychology at Cornell. That Human Bonding course seems very popular! May be a good fit for a relationship scientist out there. Below is a snippet of the job ad.
Reposted by Samantha Joel
eikofried.bsky.social
Had missed this absolutely brilliant paper. They take a widely used social media addiction scale & replace 'social media' with 'friends'. The resulting scale has great psychometric properties & 69% of people have friend addictions.

link.springer.com/article/10.3...
Development of an Offline-Friend Addiction Questionnaire (O-FAQ): Are most people really social addicts? - Behavior Research Methods
A growing number of self-report measures aim to define interactions with social media in a pathological behavior framework, often using terminology focused on identifying those who are ‘addicted’ to engaging with others online. Specifically, measures of ‘social media addiction’ focus on motivations for online social information seeking, which could relate to motivations for offline social information seeking. However, it could be the case that these same measures could reveal a pattern of friend addiction in general. This study develops the Offline-Friend Addiction Questionnaire (O-FAQ) by re-wording items from highly cited pathological social media use scales to reflect “spending time with friends”. Our methodology for validation follows the current literature precedent in the development of social media ‘addiction’ scales. The O-FAQ had a three-factor solution in an exploratory sample of N = 807 and these factors were stable in a 4-week retest (r = .72 to .86) and was validated against personality traits, and risk-taking behavior, in conceptually plausible directions. Using the same polythetic classification techniques as pathological social media use studies, we were able to classify 69% of our sample as addicted to spending time with their friends. The discussion of our satirical research is a critical reflection on the role of measurement and human sociality in social media research. We question the extent to which connecting with others can be considered an ‘addiction’ and discuss issues concerning the validation of new ‘addiction’ measures without relevant medical constructs. Readers should approach our measure with a level of skepticism that should be afforded to current social media addiction measures.
link.springer.com
Reposted by Samantha Joel
protzko.bsky.social
We should fear common method variance; especially in self-report scales.

A nonsense likert scale ‘predicts’ later relationship satisfaction.
We are getting results using methods when we are measuring nothing.

From @datingdecisions.bsky.social

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1...

#psych #stats
datingdecisions.bsky.social
I swear I've read this exact tutorial at least eight times
Reposted by Samantha Joel
thomas-zhihao-luo.bsky.social
How does the brain decide? 🧠

Our new @nature.com paper shows that neural activity switches from an 'evidence gathering' to a 'commitment' state at a precise moment we call nTc.

After nTc, new evidence is ignored, revealing a neural marker for the instant when the mind is made up.

rdcu.be/eGUrv
Transitions in dynamical regime and neural mode during perceptual decisions - Nature
Simultaneous recordings were made of hundreds of neurons in the rat frontal cortex and striatum, showing that decision commitment involves a rapid, coordinated transition in dynamical regime and neura...
www.nature.com
datingdecisions.bsky.social
That is SUCH bullshit. I'm sorry Jessie.
datingdecisions.bsky.social
This is the visa that the US gives to new faculty members.
datingdecisions.bsky.social
How exactly is any sort of scientific forum supposed to "avoid politics" when science is currently being systematically dismantled by a political party?
Reposted by Samantha Joel
gmacdonalduoft.bsky.social
Is the idea that getting into a romantic relationship increases well-being a myth? A new MacLab paper says no. And I had so much to say about this work, I started a Substack: The Unromantic. Links for the paper and the Substack in replies.
datingdecisions.bsky.social
I think I might just hurl my laptop into the sea
jamiecummins.bsky.social
Can large language models stand in for human participants?
Many social scientists seem to think so, and are already using "silicon samples" in research.

One problem: depending on the analytic decisions made, you can basically get these samples to show any effect you want.

THREAD 🧵
The threat of analytic flexibility in using large language models to simulate human data: A call to attention
Social scientists are now using large language models to create "silicon samples" - synthetic datasets intended to stand in for human respondents, aimed at revolutionising human subjects research. How...
arxiv.org
Reposted by Samantha Joel
mskellymhayes.bsky.social
Most folks will find their courage by finding their people.
Reposted by Samantha Joel
mskellymhayes.bsky.social
I've watched a lot of people find their courage. They usually believed in something, but they also believed in each other. As co-strugglers, they depended on each other. They comforted and encouraged each other. They helped each other. That investment made them stronger, bolder, and more capable.
Reposted by Samantha Joel
mskellymhayes.bsky.social
In my experience, courage is usually the product of love and/or solidarity. When we are deeply invested in each other, we are more likely to take risks that we wouldn't take out of mere principle, or for the sake of people we feel disconnected from. Our alienation mass produces cowardice.
datingdecisions.bsky.social
For potential grad students: if you're interested in this kind of work on assessing and improving close relationships measures, our group just got a grant to do five more years of it. Join our team!
Reposted by Samantha Joel
davekhera.bsky.social
Helena's qualitative work for this was so amazing. Participants summed up sentiment override and their use of global evaluations for us really nicely.
Despite the unclear meaning of the items, many participants tried to rate them by drawing on information about their own romantic relationships. A total of 88.89% of participants referenced their own relationships in response to at least one item, and many of these responses (41.46%) drew on global, usually positive feelings about the relationship. For example, when asked to justify a rating to the snowdrop item, a participant wrote, “I love the person I am in a relationship with. 7 was the highest number I could choose to indicate how much I love them.” In response to the umbra item, another wrote, “I wasn’t sure what umbra meant. But I appreciate everything that comes with my relationship, so I clicked ‘agree.’”
Reposted by Samantha Joel
brownwt.bsky.social
I’ve watched Sam give two talks about this topic (once as a first year grad student which was extremely formative for my research trajectory). Very excited to see this in print!
datingdecisions.bsky.social
It even has process evidence- asking participants what they think the scale items mean. (Shoutout to my grad student Helena Qin).

Psychologists generally know way too little about what participants think of our measures.