Ritika C
LightNews LightNews
ritikac.bsky.social
Ritika C
@ritikac.bsky.social
35 followers 42 following 18 posts
phd student @ucl @wellcometrust in mental health science. trauma researcher, ex-clinician. promote marginalised voices. been told I've got no chill. cat person.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
ritikac.bsky.social
Ritika C @ritikac.bsky.social · Dec 1
V excited to have 1st study from my PhD out as a preprint. We looked at whether interpersonal adversity in childhood is associated with changes in trust, mentalizing, agency and interpersonal emotion regulation and in turn, with mental health. All feedback much appreciated :) osf.io/preprints/ps...
OSF
osf.io
Reposted by Ritika C
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
Reposted by Ritika C
abeba.bsky.social
also, i'm looking for a phd student to join our team at the @aial.ie

bsky.app/profile/abeb...
abeba.bsky.social Dr Abeba Birhane @abeba.bsky.social · 18d
are you disgruntled by the current safety evaluation landscape? curious about what conceptual clarity, methodological soundness and rigour in AI evaluation might look like? if so, consider coming to dublin and doing a phd with me

apply here: aial.ie/hiring/phd-a...
About the PhD Audits and evaluation of AI systems — and the broader context that AI systems operate in — have become central to conceptualising, quantifying, measuring and understanding the operations, failures, limitations, underlying assumptions, and downstream societal implications of AI systems. Existing AI audit and evaluation efforts are fractured, done in a siloed and ad-hoc manner, and with little deliberation and reflection around conceptual rigour and methodological validity. This PhD is for a candidate that is passionate about exploring what a conceptually cogent, methodologically sound, and well-founded AI evaluation and safety research might look like. This requires grappling with questions such as: What does it mean to represent “ground truth” in proxies, synthetic data, or computational simulation? How do we reliably measure abstract and complex phenomena? What are the epistemological or methodological implications of quantification and measurement approaches we choose to employ? Particularly, what underlying presuppositions, values, or perspectives do they entail? How do we ensure the lived experiences of impacted communities play a critical role in the development and justification of measurement metrics and proxies? Through exploration of these questions, the candidate is expected to engage with core concepts in the philosophy of science, history of science, Black feminist epistemologies, and similar schools of thought to develop an in-depth understanding of existing practices with the aim of applying it to advance shared standards and best practice in AI evaluation. The candidate is expected to integrate empirical (for example, through analysis or evaluation of existing benchmarks) or practical (for example, by executing evaluation of AI systems) components into the overall work.
December 22, 2025 at 5:02 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
angierasmussen.bsky.social
This is not the first time RFK Jr or his fellow anti-vax travelers conducted a study they knew would harm or kill children in low-income countries. It is a dehumanizing, colonialist model of manufacturing evidence: sacrificing foreign kids for political pseudoscience.
www.notus.org/health-scien...
CDC to Fund Controversial Study in West Africa on Infant Hepatitis B Vaccines
The study prompted swift outcry from scientists in the U.S. who say it’s “unethical.”
www.notus.org
December 19, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
cfiesler.bsky.social
Let me tell you a story. Perhaps you can guess where this is going... though it does have a bit of a twist.

I was poking around Google Scholar for publications about the relationship between chatbots and wellness. Oh how useful: a systematic literature review! Let's dig into the findings. 🧵
The Psychological Impact of Digital Isolation: How AI-Driven Social Interactions Shape Human Behavior and Mental Well-Being Felix Eling 3697-3705 Apr 30, 2025 Education The Psychological Impact of Digital Isolation: How AI-Driven Social Interactions Shape Human Behavior and Mental Well-Being Felix Eling Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Pharmacy, Gulu College of Health Sciences, Gulu City, Northern Uganda DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90400265 Received: 13 March 2025; Revised: 22 March 2025; Accepted: 25 March 2025; Published: 30 April 2025 ABSTRACT The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in social interactions has transformed how humans experience companionship, communication, and mental well-being. This review examines the psychological impact of AI-driven social interactions, focusing on virtual assistants, AI chatbots, and digital companions. It explores the benefits, risks, and ethical concerns associated with AI companionship. A systematic review methodology was employed, detailing inclusion criteria, databases searched, and analysis techniques. Findings suggest that while AI can offer emotional relief and support, over-reliance may disrupt real-world social bonding. Ethical concerns such as data privacy, emotional manipulation, and regulatory gaps are highlighted. The study underscores the need for balanced AI integration in human socialization. The study also addresses gaps in previous literature by examining AI’s influence on different demographic groups and cultural contexts.
December 5, 2025 at 10:35 PM
ritikac.bsky.social
Hilarious thread
ianhussey.mmmdata.io Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · Dec 2
Significantly more devastating when I ask it. Ouch.
December 3, 2025 at 7:13 AM
ritikac.bsky.social
V excited to have 1st study from my PhD out as a preprint. We looked at whether interpersonal adversity in childhood is associated with changes in trust, mentalizing, agency and interpersonal emotion regulation and in turn, with mental health. All feedback much appreciated :) osf.io/preprints/ps...
OSF
osf.io
December 1, 2025 at 3:23 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
abeba.bsky.social
and all of the arguments we made 5 yrs ago in this paper about why the idea of robot rights relies on faulty assumptions about the nature of human cognition and intelligence still hold

Robot Rights?: Let's Talk about Human Welfare Instead dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1...
November 25, 2025 at 10:54 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
sarahgarf.bsky.social
** Recruiting a postdoc ** We are looking for a postdoc to work on emotion, mental health, and interoception, based in London at @ucl.ac.uk in my lab (Clinical and Affective Neuroscience). Part of a large Wellcome Grant (co-led with the brilliant @camillanord.bsky.social)
November 24, 2025 at 12:22 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
jacqueswels.bsky.social
6 days to go to apply to 2 postdoc positions (3-year and 2-year) at @ucl.ac.uk with @pravpatalay.bsky.social!
For all those interested in employment<->health, trade unions & longitudinal methods.
Feel free to share.
www.jobs.ac.uk/job/DPB406/r...
Research Fellow (x2 posts) at UCL
Apply for the Research Fellow (x2 posts) role on jobs.ac.uk, the top job board for academic positions in higher education. View details and apply now.
www.jobs.ac.uk
November 10, 2025 at 11:54 AM
Reposted by Ritika C
peterwalker99.bsky.social
Here this all is as a story. The Conservatives said they would provide clarity, but they have not as yet.

www.theguardian.com/politics/202...
Deporting legally settled people is ‘broadly in line’ with Tory policy, says Badenoch’s office
Conservative leader’s spokesperson sets out plan to strip the right of indefinite leave to remain from people claiming benefits
www.theguardian.com
October 22, 2025 at 4:01 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
sundersays.bsky.social
Katie Lam has made a video - focusing on not giving new ILR grants to people who don't have it

But quietly including the Conservative proposal to be the first government since Idi Amin in 1972 to revoke the permanent leave to remain, then expel: she underplays to what extent
x.com/Katie_Lam_MP...
x.com
October 21, 2025 at 8:49 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
sachaepskamp.bsky.social
Please share! There are still spots available for my 3-day workshop on psychometric network modeling of longitudinal data in Singapore Dec 11 - 13!

fass.nus.edu.sg/psy/network-...

The workshop can be combined with a workshop Dec 8 - 10 on Foundations, Theory, and Cross-sectional Data Analysis!
October 13, 2025 at 9:33 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
laurelgd.bsky.social
I continue to believe sharing example materials is useful in academia, so in that spirit, my tenure statements and CV are now available on our Resources for Researchers website (bottom of the New PI page: www.plasticityinneurodevelopmentlab.com/resourcesfor...)
September 30, 2025 at 7:26 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
sirileknes.bsky.social
Please RT
2 new positions in the lab as postdoc & PhD!

Interested in stress, pain, or reward? This project has it all!

We are a friendly but ambitious group. Oslo is a capital city on the fjord & bordered by forest, great urban & outdoors opportunities: 💃 ⛷️ 🚣 🎭 🎶

www.jobbnorge.no/en/available...
Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (286516) | University of Oslo
Job title: Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (286516), Employer: University of Oslo, Deadline: Wednesday, October 15, 2025
www.jobbnorge.no
September 24, 2025 at 12:22 PM
Reposted by Ritika C
jfielder.bsky.social
Really excited that my first PhD paper is now out in @elife.bsky.social: Sense of control buffers against stress.

This has been a great team effort with Jinyu Shi, Dan McGlade, @docqhuys.bsky.social and Niko Steinbeis, comprising two studies and a total of N=768!

Summary thread below 🧵⬇️
Sense of control buffers against stress
doi.org
March 28, 2025 at 7:21 PM