Oscar Lecuona
LightNews LightNews
banner
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Oscar Lecuona
@oscarlecuona.bsky.social
980 followers 450 following 130 posts
Assistant Professor at @UCM_Psico
https://linktr.ee/oscar.lecuona

#mindfulness | #nonmonogamous | #networkanalysis | #psychometrics | #metascience
@[email protected]

Spiral out, keep going.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Oscar Lecuona @oscarlecuona.bsky.social · Aug 19
We got published! We synthesized 21 systematic reviews of RCTs testing of interventions can impact character strengths and well-being. Almost 62k abstracts screened and immense work!
doi.org/10.1111/aphw...
A synthesis of RCTs on psychological interventions fostering strengths and virtues: Evidence from 21 systematic reviews
Research on mental health advocates the cultivation of character strengths to enhance well-being. Existing meta-analyses support positive correlations between strengths and well-being, and an increas...
doi.org
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
sashagusevposts.bsky.social
I wrote a little bit about the "missing heritability" question and several recent studies that have brought it to a close. A short 🧵
The missing heritability question is now (mostly) answered
Not with a bang but with a whimper
theinfinitesimal.substack.com
November 21, 2025 at 10:34 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
chelseaparlett.bsky.social
IF YOURE NOT GOING TO LOOK AT THE UNCERTAINTY OF YOUR ESTIMATES WHY BOTHER DOING THE ANALYSIS AT ALL

#pikasShoutStats
A pika shouting while sitting on a rock
November 21, 2025 at 8:50 PM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Just released my short course on Bayesian Data Analysis using JASP. Hope you find it useful!

📚Materials, scripts, data and links: doi.org/10.17605/OSF...

📺 Playlist: www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...

#StatsEd #Bayes #OpenScience #Statistics #Teaching
@rosenetwork.bsky.social
Bayesian Data Analysis with JASP: Course for the EAM - YouTube
Short course to cover Bayesian Data Analysis. Starts at the foundations of probability and statistical inference, how Bayesian inference is built and how it ...
www.youtube.com
November 21, 2025 at 3:23 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Super relevant to ground the critique on scientific publishing. And the cause is pretty simple: the product they sell is made and refined for free, to then charge for it to the same community
paolocrosetto.bsky.social Paolo Crosetto @paolocrosetto.bsky.social · 13d
What is the most profitable industry in the world, this side of the law? Not oil, not IT, not pharma.

It's *scientific publishing*.

We call this the Drain of Scientific Publishing.

Paper: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Background: doi.org/10.1162/qss_...

Thread @markhanson.fediscience.org.ap.brid.gy 👇
November 18, 2025 at 7:26 PM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Este sábado 22 estaré con otras compañera, en mi caso hablando de la revolución de la credibilidad y la crisis de replicacion
November 17, 2025 at 6:54 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
meadekrosby.bsky.social
Thinking only of Rosalind Franklin today, and what was stolen from her (and so many other female scientists alongside her).
Rosalind Franklin and the damage of gender harassment
Spurred by a recent report on sexual harassment in academia, our columnist revisits a historical case and reflects on what has changed—and what hasn’t
www.science.org
November 7, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
miriforbes.bsky.social
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/
A figure of the results from our study, showing a model that looks remarkably similar to the official HiTOP model. There are also important differences like a pathological introversion domain and a combined hypomania/disinhibition dimension.
November 4, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
jayvanbavel.bsky.social
Engagement-based #algorithms amplify intergroup hostility + moral-emotional content, leading it to be overrepresented in your feed

This leads us to falsely perceive that people want to see this kind of content and share more of it.

This technology fuels false polarization: osf.io/preprints/os...
November 4, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
ruben.the100.ci
I built a DAG diagram with garden hoses for teaching.
Pictured: a collider bias diagram, inspired by a blocked pipe situation I experienced (which I credit with giving me the intuition though it also ruined my belongings in the flooded cellar).
me with some garden hoses connected in a X -> Z <- Y fashion. If I shut the valve at Z, water from X spills out at Y
October 28, 2025 at 5:50 PM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
In Madrid we face extraordinary cuts and losses in budget, my uni may be unable to pay workers in mid-term. This is caused by govt pushing privatization. Despite all of that we still fight for public, high-quality and autonomous education, making good research:

www.rtve.es/noticias/202...
www.rtve.es
October 31, 2025 at 8:46 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
annemscheel.bsky.social
There still seems to be a lot of confusion about significance testing in psych. No, p-values *don’t* become useless at large N. This flawed point also used to be framed as "too much power". But power isn't the problem – it's 1) unbalanced error rates and 2) the (lack of a) SESOI. 1/ >
aaronjfisher.bsky.social Aaron Fisher @aaronjfisher.bsky.social · 26d
But here's, the thing, p values and significance become useless at such large sample sizes. When you're dividing the coefficient by the SE and the sample size is in the tens of thousands, EVERYTHING IS SIGNIFICANT. All you're testing is whether the coefficient is different than zero.
October 31, 2025 at 8:13 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
rincewind.run
we have gone from a world in which we were told not to cite wikipedia because it was unreliable to a world where wikipedia might be the only reliable source left on the internet and we all owe a lot to the pedantic nerds who got us there
sjshancoxli.liberalcurrents.com Dr. Samantha Hancox-Li @sjshancoxli.liberalcurrents.com · Sep 21
for all people mock it wikipedia is genuinely one of the wonders of the modern world
September 21, 2025 at 8:52 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
markrubin.bsky.social
"Progress in theorising means treating our theories as works in progress in need of continuous improvement, and this sometimes also means having to kill one’s darlings."

Martijn van Zomeren and @ayseuskul.bsky.social introduce the ERSP special issue on theorizing in social psychology.

#SocialPsyc
Introduction to the ERSP special issue on “Reflections on social-psychological theorizing and the state of our field”
Published in European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 36, No. 2, 2025)
doi.org
September 21, 2025 at 9:52 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
juliaserano.bsky.social
many ppl highlighting flaws in this article. but having fought in the "80% desistance" wars of the mid-2010s, I remember asking anti-trans activists if they'd be ok if 80% of youth were helped by gender-affirming care (flipping their argument). & they *never* answered. b/c they want *zero* trans ppl
screenshot of a The Economist post that reads: "A recent study found that children who transitioned young retained stable gender identities over time. But the fact that nearly a fifth of those in the group did not ought to give advocates of irreversible medical interventions pause". the byline of the linked to article says "a study finds that one in five who switch gender change their mind"
September 21, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
barackobama.bsky.social
After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like.
Let’s be clear about what happened to Jimmy Kimmel
Trump’s most brazen attack on free speech yet.
www.yahoo.com
September 18, 2025 at 2:10 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
hadas.bsky.social
2 years ago today
August 30, 2025 at 4:17 AM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
Colleague added an open-access full-text + paper database in the same file, easy access to the full information:

Link here:

www.researchgate.net/publication/...
August 26, 2025 at 11:36 AM
oscarlecuona.bsky.social
We got published! We synthesized 21 systematic reviews of RCTs testing of interventions can impact character strengths and well-being. Almost 62k abstracts screened and immense work!
doi.org/10.1111/aphw...
A synthesis of RCTs on psychological interventions fostering strengths and virtues: Evidence from 21 systematic reviews
Research on mental health advocates the cultivation of character strengths to enhance well-being. Existing meta-analyses support positive correlations between strengths and well-being, and an increas...
doi.org
August 19, 2025 at 9:55 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
alexh.bsky.social
A wide-ranging Nature News article on developments in peer review. Like we mentioned in our billion-dollar donation article (link.springer.com/article/10.1...), I think peer review should be opened up via more post-publication (preprinting) review and smaller checks, www.nature.com/articles/d41...
The peer-review crisis: how to fix an overloaded system
Journals and funders are trying to boost the speed and effectiveness of review processes that are under strain.
www.nature.com
August 8, 2025 at 12:49 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
gilduran.com
Tech fascism, like the tech libertarianism that birthed it, specializes in hijacking left-wing ideals, repackaging them as right-wing ideology, and selling the resulting sludge as “moderate/centrist/common sense.”

The roots of this go very deep. Keep an eye out!
August 6, 2025 at 11:10 PM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
worldresources.bsky.social
🌲🧯Forest fires are increasing. Does climate change play a role?

The short answer? Yes, it does.

The hotter, drier conditions create the vicious "climate-fire feedback loop," leading to more devastating and frequent fires. Get the long answer👉 go.wri.org/climate-fire-loop-bs
5 Graphics Explain the Climate-Fire Feedback Loop
Climate change is making forest fires worse, and vice-versa — creating a vicious "climate-fire feedback loop" that has helped fuel record burns in recent years.
go.wri.org
August 6, 2025 at 8:20 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
thestrugglings4.bsky.social
DON'T PANIIKK 😱
August 8, 2025 at 8:06 AM
Reposted by Oscar Lecuona
fernandoblancopsy.com
A veces desde la psicología no podemos evitar mirar con cierta ternura a los economistas tradicionales, los del Homo economicus, la racionalidad y la maximización del beneficio.
Nosotros sabemos que el ser humano a veces toma decisiones irracionales, o es solidario, o cortoplacista...
kerk.bsky.social Kᴇʀᴋ, Dᴏᴅᴏɢᴀᴍᴀ sɪɴ ᴘᴇɴsᴀᴍɪᴇɴᴛᴏs @kerk.bsky.social · Jul 26
No, Wikipedia no es una anomalía económica. El espacio de internet ha sido siempre para compartir de manera desinteresada, desde wikipedia hasta los foros. Es el capitalismo el que lo ha anegado con sus mierdas.

Aceptar este marco político es jugar con las cartas marcadas.
tuthanhha.bsky.social Tu Thanh Ha @tuthanhha.bsky.social · Jul 26
“Wikipedia is this economic anomaly. In many ways, it’s sort of magical that people will just volunteer without explicit economic incentives to create artifacts that are meant to share knowledge with everyone in the world”
July 27, 2025 at 9:33 AM