Sabrina Norwood
LightNews LightNews
banner
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
Sabrina Norwood
@sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
610 followers 400 following 65 posts
Postdoc at Oxford Internet Institute. Researching digital technologies, digital behaviour and well-being.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
jbgruber.bsky.social
After a long time in development, {traktok} #rstats is now finally on CRAN!

Whether you have access to the Research API or just want to scrape some pages, traktok has you covered

jbgruber.github.io/traktok/
November 24, 2025 at 8:50 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
tomhardwicke.bsky.social
Congratulations to @simine.com well deserved winner of the Einstein Foundation Individual Award for Promoting Quality in Research 2025 🎉 www.einsteinfoundation.de/en/media/pre...
November 24, 2025 at 10:46 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
tothrol.bsky.social
🚨 Preprint alert: Do 1) smartphone event log data access and 2) the Experience Sampling Method cause reactivity effects in studies? @dougaparry.bsky.social, @klingelhoefer.bsky.social, and I investigated this very question using data from 815 German Android users.

doi.org/10.31235/osf...
OSF
doi.org
November 17, 2025 at 10:09 AM
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
Pretty cool is an understatement.

There is 1.5 million hours of video game play recorded, via telemetry data! This is a very cool study🎮
sinandrei.bsky.social Tamas Andrei Foldes @sinandrei.bsky.social · 11d
We released a pretty cool dataset/preprint today looking at video game play, cognition, time-use and a ton of self-reported psych measures at osf.io/preprints/ps... with @nballou.bsky.social @matti.vuorre.com @thomashakman.bsky.social @rpsychologist.com and @shuhbillskee.bsky.social RRs coming soon
Survey administration schedule across the 12-week study period. Participants completed biweekly surveys (orange) every two weeks, with US participants additionally completing daily surveys (blue) for the first 30 days. Cognitive tests (green) were administered during biweekly surveys at weeks 1, 5, and 9. Gray circles indicate days with no scheduled surveys. Retention percentages show the proportion of baseline participants (N=1978) who were still active at each measurement week (defined as having completed either a daily or biweekly survey at any time after that week) Diurnal play across Xbox, Nintendo, Steam. Sample of daily gaming patterns and mental wellbeing for three representative participants. Stacked bars represent total daily playtime across platforms. Orange line shows biweekly mental wellbeing scores (short WEMWBS) measured at six study waves. Participants were selected from those closest to the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of total playtime, prioritizing those with the most varied multi-platform gaming behavior. Participant IDs: p9009984081 (25th percentile), p8809196928 (50th percentile), p7162729307 (75th percentile)
November 14, 2025 at 5:02 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
orbenamy.bsky.social
📣 Digital Research Community!

The new UK Adolescent Health Study will follow 100k young people (8–18yrs) for 10+ years. Please share what digital technology measures you think it should include.

Please complete this survey (by 24th November 2025 @ 9AM): cambridge.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_...
Adolescent Health Survey - Digital Media
Expert guidance shaping digital media questions in upcoming Adolescent Health Study.
cambridge.eu.qualtrics.com
November 14, 2025 at 3:33 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
dsbarra.bsky.social
Sage webinar on Registered Reports (RRs/RRRs)! I'm excited to participate, and if you have any curiosity about writing a RR or reviewing a RR, please consider joining the webinar. Spread the word-- thanks! @psychscience.bsky.social
journals.sagepub.com Sage Journals @journals.sagepub.com · 15d
📢 Join our upcoming Registered Reports webinar!

Don't miss out on this opportunity to enhance your research! We will cover the following topics:
- Two-stage review explained
- Tips for Stage 1 protocols
- Common author challenges

Register now: https://ow.ly/R6yH50Xptt0 #RegisteredReports #Webinar
Welcome! You are invited to join a webinar: How to Do Research and Get Published - How to Write & Review Registered Reports. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the webinar.
This webinar will provide an overview of the Registered Reports format, a publishing model designed to improve transparency and reproducibility in scientific research. The session will cover the structure and purpose of Registered Reports, including the two-stage submission and review process. Presenters will discuss how to develop a Stage 1 protocol, what reviewers typically evaluate at Stage 1 and 2, and common challenges encountered by authors and reviewers. The webinar is intended for researchers, editors, and reviewers who are working with or considering Registered Reports. Hosted by...
ow.ly
November 10, 2025 at 8:55 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
cassyvogel.bsky.social
This informative thread is essential reading for anyone in science, in my opinion!
hansonmark.bsky.social Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 14d
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 12, 2025 at 7:53 AM
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
and other lies I tell myself
November 6, 2025 at 11:12 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
aliciaernst.bsky.social
🎉 📣 Out now in Communication Research! 📣 🎉

What makes us stop using #media in a specific situation?

A new study by my great co-author @annastockmann.bsky.social and me examines situational #disengagement from #TikTok and #Instagram. 📱 🔚

Find the paper here: journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1...
November 5, 2025 at 11:23 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
robertboehm.bsky.social
We're hiring! @univie.ac.at is seeking a TT Assistant Professor in the Psychology of Digitalization. If your work is about automation, AI, or immersive technology (e.g., VR) in the context of work and organizations (broadly defined), we’d love to hear from you. 👇
October 29, 2025 at 6:24 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
rpsychologist.com
New release of PowerLMM.js! Browser-based power analysis for longitudinal models with dropout.

Now includes:
- Power analysis summary report
- Reproducible & shareable configs (URL/JSON)
- Calculations validated against R
- Hypothesis region visualization

powerlmmjs.rpsychologist.com
October 28, 2025 at 2:02 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
janalasser.bsky.social
My lab is looking for a Senior Scientist (= PostDoc with option of permanency)!

We are looking for someone interested in doing cutting-edge computational social science + helping us with data & software engineering 🤓.

See job ad for details jobs.uni-graz.at/en/jobs/7d14...
Universität Graz
jobs.uni-graz.at
October 28, 2025 at 7:02 AM
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
Me to the OSF website when it stops responding
Text reads: “don’t make me hate you. Loving you is painful enough.”
October 27, 2025 at 1:36 PM
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
Behaviour doesn’t occur in a vacuum. If social media is meeting a need in young people’s lives, that need won’t just disappear if we ban the platforms. It will go unmet. We need to address the need, not just the tool.
cameronwilson.bsky.social CAMERON WILSON @cameronwilson.bsky.social · Oct 24
Australia's children's commissioner Anne Hollonds has seen "nothing" to address gaps in community and support left by the teen social media ban.

A year after first raising the alarm, Hollonds says we need to take a "good, hard look at the unmet needs" of vulnerable kids.

www.crikey.com.au/20...
October 24, 2025 at 6:23 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
matti.vuorre.com
I am hiring PhD candidates to study the psychology of attention & technology use at @tilburg-university.bsky.social.

We're looking for motivated & curious scholars with expertise in cognitive psychology and statistics, and offer a friendly work environment with great terms & benefits.

tiu.nu/22989
An aerial photograph of the Tilburg University campus.
October 23, 2025 at 3:04 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
stephenschueller.bsky.social
Just a few more days until our FREE workshop: "Demystifying Data Donation Methods to Advance Digital Health Research" sponsored by TYDE and CERES

tyde.virginia.edu/event/demyst...

Saturday, Oct. 25 from 11am-5pm ET / 8am - 2pm PT

Learn more about using passive data in mental health research
Demystifying Data Donation Methods to Advance Digital Health Research - TYDE
Curious about teens’ digital lives? There’s a better way than guessing. Ask them directly and let them share their data with you.   Join TYDE and CERES for a free, intensive virtual workshop designed ...
tyde.virginia.edu
October 21, 2025 at 4:52 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
ianhussey.mmmdata.io
New hobby:

Remaking article abstracts as movie trailers to expose hype and fearmongering.
October 20, 2025 at 10:22 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
ianhussey.mmmdata.io
Results of the replication are in!

Chocolate is more desirable than poop:

Cohen's d_rm = 6.20, 95%CI [5.63, 6.78]

N = 486, two single item 1-7 Likert scales of desirability.

w/
@jamiecummins.bsky.social
ianhussey.mmmdata.io Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · Oct 13
Make an effect size prediction!

@jamiecummins.bsky.social and I are replicating Balcetis & Dunning's (2010) "chocolate is more desirable than poop" (Cohen's d = 4.52)

Let us known in the replies what effect size you think we'll find. Details of the study in the thread below.
October 14, 2025 at 6:16 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
matti.vuorre.com
Against Publishing: universonline.nl/nieuws/2025/...

Preprints are read, shared, and cited, yet still dismissed as incomplete until blessed by a publisher. I argue that the true measure of scholarship lies in open exchange, not in the industry’s gatekeeping of what counts as published.
October 14, 2025 at 9:16 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
aufdroeseler.bsky.social
ReplicationResearch.org is now open for submissions!

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.
October 10, 2025 at 6:12 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
ianhussey.mmmdata.io
My article "Data is not available upon request" was published in Meta-Psychology. Very happy to see this out!
open.lnu.se/index.php/me...
LnuOpen | Meta-Psychology
open.lnu.se
October 4, 2025 at 12:54 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
jamiecummins.bsky.social
@science.org just dropped a story covering this preprint! Check it out below, and thanks to @cathleenogrady.bsky.social for the great write-up! www.science.org/content/arti...
October 1, 2025 at 8:10 AM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
dagmarvorlicek.bsky.social
Just a thought but academics on limited contracts doing major teaching and research load at universities want stability and transparent rules on job prospects not a “postdoc appreciation week” #ichbinhanna
September 12, 2025 at 1:16 PM
Reposted by Sabrina Norwood
jamiecummins.bsky.social
I was thrilled to be invited to contribute to a forthcoming special issue for The Psychologist magazine called "Psychology needs a ... revolution".

I wrote about AI and its use in psychology: particularly how we can learn lessons from the past to avoid repeating old mistakes.
@psychmag.bsky.social
Psychology needs… an AI revolution | BPS
Psychology is in the midst of an AI revolution. But it’s not the one it needs, argues Jamie Cummins.
www.bps.org.uk
September 1, 2025 at 10:26 AM
sabrinanorwood.bsky.social
What if we thought about digital behaviour not in terms of the form that it takes but the psychological functions that it serves?

In this preprint we introduce technological behaviourism, a theoretical approach grounded in operant conditioning.

@shuhbillskee.bsky.social
figure showing four functions and antecedent behaviour consequence sequence for each
August 25, 2025 at 4:32 PM