There's got to be SOME hypothesis that makes our experiment useless. THINK! COMIC ◆ www.smbc-comics.com/comic/stats-3 PATREON ◆ www.patreon.com/ZachWeinersm... STORE ◆ smbc-store.myshopify.com

@bmj.com has issued an expression of concern for a paper claiming stem cell therapy can reduce the risk of heart failure. The move comes after sleuths and scientists critiqued the “complete mismatch” between the study data and the article itself.

You know what they say about academics... "causal" in the streets "preliminary and hypothesis-generating" in the sheets

Bug in Springer Nature metadata may be causing ‘significant, systemic’ citation inflation

The editors of Neurology have allowed the authors of this paper to make a "correction", stating: "there were errors in the CIs for some estimates presented in the article". How many CIs must be wrong before a journal loses confidence in a paper? (Answer: more than 73, apparently!)

A week after @bmj.com published a highly publicized paper claiming stem cell therapy can reduce the risk of heart failure, sleuths have unearthed what they are calling “serious” inconsistencies in the data.

"[...] Riecken held an exalted status within the group—one he cultivated through deception. According to the archival material, Riecken fabricated psychic messages from extraterrestrials to shape group behavior including the pivotal events that unfolded on the night of the failed prophecy."

Ok, just wow. If the content of this article is right, this is depressing. We're slowly reaching the point where ~100% of what I was taught in Social Psych was either innocently wrong or plainly frauded onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1...

1) Avant la détection d'erreur : les origines de @steamtraen.eu Dans ce premier épisode d'une série d'entretien, on revient sur le passé de Nick, avant qu'il ne s'engage dans la détection d'erreurs. Si vous aviez envie de le découvrir, l'épisode se trouve ici : creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/...

Shamelessly stolen (and modified) from SMBC: www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db...

People often miss something about these headlines. 1. This is bone idle useless image manipulation - detectable, obvious after you learn to look for it. 2. It’s a lower bound. The phrase is “a minimum of 40% of this literature contains easily detectable image manipulation”. Sleep well.

Si nous parlions science toute la nuit ? J'ai été invité à la Nuit Zététque 2025. Le sujet : "la science en danger ?", pour deux tables rondes : ⤵️

Mais c'est dans 2 jours ! Venez nous voir déblatérer des trucs en vrai ou en ligne. En plus, il y aura de vrais morceaux de @antoninatger.bsky.social dedans, excellent être humain de son état. Il y est même plein de fois, pour qu'on puisse en profiter

This is a very painful question, but as a trained psychological-brain-behavioral-science-scientist, I think it needs to be asked. In particular: are statistics in psychology mainly a ritual to turn hypotheses into unfalsifiable conclusions? (but with numbers, and everyone knows numbers = science)

Authors on social media: "We wrote a preprint with important social implications! Governments, change your policies now!" Us: "There are issues in this preprint" Tenured researcher not on the paper "SHHHHHHHH, how dare you criticize other researchers publicly? Go talk to them in private"

Please someone help me figure out the rest of this joke

Je serai à la Nuit Zététique ce 25 octobre. Ca va parler fraudes et méthodes d'investigation scientifiques, au sein d'un évènement qui traite d'actualités importantes au sein du fonctionnement scientifique et de sa récupération nauséabonde. Venez et contribuez si vous pouvez !

Some researchers don't discuss their future research plans for fear of being scooped. Not me. I drop bad ideas for unscrupulous people to 'steal'. - What are the neural correlates of Open Science practices? - What is the role of habits in learning a new skill through repetitive practice?

Nature News has a short piece on the survey we did in conjunction with the FAIRS meeting on responding to serious research misconduct www.nature.com/articles/d41...

In our recent paper "public engagement with research reproducibility", we explain, with a simple example -cooking meringue Xmas trees- "what research reproducibility means". A very fun 🧵 about science... plos.io/49z4ZQy

Le « peer-review » en 2025. #UnpopularOpinion : la revue par les pairs est morte comme outil de contrôle de la qualité scientifique face aux récompenses à la publication. Et on n'a rien d'autre. Donc le seul moyen d'en sortir est de supprimer toutes les récompenses à la publication.

J'ai fait un résumé des saloperies de Grok de ces derniers jours. Viol, complot juif, idéologie trans, soutiens à la race blanche... Mais j'ai merdé : J'ai dû refaire le poste, alors Lkd risque d'enterrer le doc. Mais il est ici (13 pages), si vous voulez 😶‍🌫️ www.linkedin.com/posts/floren...

I am often told that public critique of published articles must also solve the issues found. I think this frequently enforced requirement hinders scientific self-correction. Blog post: mmmdata.io/posts/2025/0...

“It is possible to support science and hold it accountable at the same time.” www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...

Call for submissions: Paul Meehl Graduate School Meta Research Symposium 2025! October 17, 2025, at Eindhoven University of Technology Keynotes: Dr. Duygu Uygun-Tunç and Dr. Lisa Spitzer ECR's: Submit your talk before 31st of June! paulmeehlschool.github.io/2025-05-26-p...

I wrote a blogpost on something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately: how metascientists could (and should) think more about their users when designing tools and reforms. Would love to hear any thoughts on this topic! #metascience #usercentered

We're back, with a fresh new lineup of talks and workshops! Get your place while you still can to learn about how to make your research more robust and how to deal with scientific fraud! This event is free and open to all: tinyurl.com/3ewaduvm

N'oubliez pas d'aller faire un tour pour écouter le podcast qu'on anime avec le grand @adrienfillon.bsky.social, et plein d'invités tous plus intéressants les uns que les autres podcastaddict.com/podcast/repa...

RTS #13 sur le trilemme en psychologie, ou pourquoi la psychologie ne peut pas être en même temps transparente, cohérente et innovante. Avec en invités @paulbertin.bsky.social et @kenzonera.bsky.social. Merci à eux pour cette interview passionnante ! creators.spotify.com/pod/show/adr...

This is what real science looks like

I became aware of this article thanks to a critical article taking it as an example, and a response to the criticism. But I must admit that I'm quite surprised by one of the experimental conditions. Please, help me make it make sense. www.nature.com/articles/s41...

A common sentiment is “I can’t share my code because it’s messy and there might be errors” But if it’s that untrustworthy, why are you publishing the results it generates?

Save the date for the 8th Perspectives on Scientific Error conference on 11, 12, and 13 Februari 2026 in Leiden, the Netherlands. perspectivesonscientificerror2026.wordpress.com This is an event not to miss, bringing together philosophers, statisticians, and metascientists.

Finally got around to incorporating all Github feedback on my open access textbook, making around 20 minor improvements, and updating some references. 17 chapters of state of the art stats and methods education, freely available for any course you teach. lakens.github.io/statistical_...

Une chouette expérience de la vulgarisation scientifique et juste un super moment de discussion avec @adrienfillon.bsky.social et @nathlarigaldie.bsky.social . Merci ✌️

And, another one: whenever people vaguely allude to the fact that science requires trust (with which I agree!) but then that somehow implies we shouldn’t exert effort to catch fraud, or even just value such efforts

I’ve seen situations in which people try to correct the scientific record and then critics act like that was superfluous or just not the right way to use one’s energy because “science is self-correcting.” This just came to my mind

Exactly a year ago, a paper claimed apple cider vinegar was as effective as Ozempic for weight loss. *Clearly wrong.* This is the story of exactly one year of dealing with this paper. And the very normal, very complete failure of governance that resulted. open.substack.com/pub/jamescla...

Un grand Merci a @yvansonjon.bsky.social et @mystererabbit.bsky.social pour les 3 épisodes « Pourquoi on a mal ? » Ça nourrit beaucoup ma réflexion ! Abonnez-vous au podcast de Projet Utopia !!! podcast.ausha.co/projet-utopi...

Try it yourself! regcheck.app

Good to know. Asking: "could you please state in your manuscript which tests are not corrected for multiple comparisons and why?" after authors stated "our tests were corrected for multiple comparisons" but half of them were not, is now being "an extremist" 😬

Stanford. How do you keep doing this. minnesotareformer.com/2025/01/14/j...

Excellent† blog post by Andrew Gelman: 7 steps to junk science that can achieve worldly success statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2025/01/17/7... † Disclosure: Mentions me.

If you would like to read what I hope (and tried) to make the best (=most conceptually rigorous) review of preregistration and Registered Reports currently in the literature, see our recent paper: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

Did some tDCS a few years back for my Master's thesis. All researchers working with it I knew constantly said the same thing: ~ "we know a lot of people who managed to get effects with tDCS, so it clearly works. But the effect is elusive, sometimes we have to redo a study several times to find it"

Leiden University received 50k from @opensciencenl.bsky.social to integrate open science into strategic priorities of various institutes and translating this into HR policies. The method will be piloted at @cwts.bsky.social and the institute of psychology www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/news/2024...

Our (@adrienfillon.bsky.social, @nathlarigaldie.bsky.social, me) commentary on Adam-Troian & Bélanger's (ATB) article claiming to have found a link between OCD symptoms and political radicalisation is out: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/... Getting it published was a bit of a wild ride. 🧵 /1

Face au Scandale de l'IHU la Nécessité de Réformes Profondes et d’Actions Décisives ------------------------- Nous invitons les chercheurs choqués par ce qu'ils lisent dans notre lettre ouverte (des années de scandales éthiques et potentiellement criminels) à la signer ici : tinyurl.com/amu-scandal

Charles Piller’s new book ‘Doctored: Fraud, Arrogance, and Tragedy in the Quest to Cure Alzheimer’s’ will come out in February. A fantastic read about those who discover science fraud and the lack of response by institutions and publishers. www.publishersweekly.com/9781668031247