Scientist, accounting, philosophy of science
1. Progress: most research looks bad at some point.
2. Scientists being scientists: seeing things that could be better -> our field sucks [more than yours]
Reposted by Kris Hardies
Solliciteren kan tot 26 februari 2026 www.uantwerpen.be/nl/jobs/vaca...
With @jessicahullman.bsky.social and @statmodeling.bsky.social
juliarohrer.com/wp-content/u...
Reposted by Kris Hardies
www.jstor.org/stable/2950909
tbf reading metascience work (e.g. on team incentives/collaboration, the idea of science audits) I do sometimes think some people would benefit from reading some accounting research
Unless, of course, whenever there is a need for some vague theory, then psychology or management will do.
apache.be/2025/10/23/a...
Such repositories likely being a bad idea was 99% my motivation of writing the commentary :-) — "go look for a theory" (in psy/econ) is already some senior researchers' advice in this field.
Reposted by Andreas De Block
@dingdingpeng.the100.ci @lakens.bsky.social @replicationindex.com @psych.peercommunityin.org @zpid.bsky.social @rickcarlsson.bsky.social @jamessteeleii.bsky.social @simine.com @eikofried.bsky.social
Thanks for sharing!
This is easier said than done, especially for an outsider.
In some cases, I guess there is sufficient evidence that has empirically discredited a specific theory ("terror management theory", for instance, I think).
So, if you know of such cases and can point me to useful references, please do!
I don't think the repository will do our field any good, so I wrote a commentary: docs.google.com/document/d/1...