For 5 years, @bjks.bsky.social has delivered episode after episode with the most influential behavioral & social psychologists of our day*. Strongly encourage you to check out his exceptional approach to hearing directly from authors that impact our field. *He also lowered standards to include me.

Nature vs Nurture...vs Options? We find that when the world around us changes rapidly like it did in 2020, our choice preferences, immediate environment, & critically, *the options available* are what truly shape behaviors. @senpei.bsky.social @sarahaj95.bsky.social www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...

The global distribution of 53,540 participants that completed our 94-country study on mental, financial, and social well-being.

How are you doing? Would you like to share? We are currently running a short survey (3-4 min) in over 90 countries and languages through the link below. No tricks, no agenda - just interested in hearing how people around the world are doing. globalmentalhealth.github.io/Research

If you were looking for something that wasn't polarized...

Tomorrow matters (almost) as much as today. In 13-country longitudinal study, we find financial well-being is as much a matter of income-wealth-debts as it is about sense of control, financial knowledge, & the future we expect (or fear). Critical data collected during extremely challenging times.

Tomorrow matters (almost) as much as today. In 13-country longitudinal study, we find financial well-being is as much a matter of income-wealth-debts as it is about sense of control, financial knowledge, & the future we expect (or fear). Critical data collected during extremely challenging times.

In a study of 100 policies & 250 policymakers, we find that a) there's no such thing as the "best" type of evidence, and b) the scale of evidence used in decisions can be a strong predictor of policy effectiveness. Freely available to all @policysciences.bsky.social

Research by @ruggeri.bsky.social suggests there is no overall “best” type of evidence for reliably predicting policy outcomes, but assessing the evidence using a ‘level’ scale offers much more robust predictions: buff.ly/4kjdOmE

Proposals for formalising evidence evaluation fascinate n disturb me. It's notable that a certain type of study strongly predicts policy success. But the key lesson from recent #philsci that evidence is only strong when you can *combine* different types of it into a robust theory of change.

In a study of 100 policies & 250 policymakers, we find that a) there's no such thing as the "best" type of evidence, and b) the scale of evidence used in decisions can be a strong predictor of policy effectiveness. Freely available to all @policysciences.bsky.social

Those headline stories about the decline of college enrollment this year were based on a typo. It actually went up. Seven percent.

Those headline stories about the decline of college enrollment this year were based on a typo. It actually went up. Seven percent.

Seriously, 2025, we just met. Slow down a little.

Happy #JobsDay! At 8:30 am ET, BLS delivers the most-important signals abt how economy is changing. Forecasts’ center: +155K jobs Unemployment rate (UR) stable at 4.2%

"Our cities are full" Our cities:

Stop fucking printing everything Sam Altman says like it's truth!

6️⃣ “A Synthesis of Evidence for Policy from Behavioural Science During COVID-19.” 👉An evaluation of 19 policy recommendations detailing how evidence from behavioral science could contribute to efforts to alleviate the COVID-19 pandemic. Led by @ruggeri.bsky.social www.nature.com/articles/s41...

New paper: We combine evidence from a survey (correlational), bank spending data, and online experiments to show that job loss increases risk taking. Joint work with @abbysussman.bsky.social, Carlos Vazquez-Hernandez, Daniel O'Leary, and Jennifer Trueblood

This is consistent with a review of 747 COVID papers we published in @nature.com finding that evidence for social science and behavior claims during COVID as very high (16/18 claims were supported) and this research was highly rigorrous (average N= 16,848) www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Thanks! I'm just posting this to show how much I appreciate all the scholars who worked their ass off during covid to do incredibly rigorous science while trying to juggle stress, childcare, illness, etc. We owe them all a sincere dept of gratitude.

A new paper finds that replicability of social and behavioural science claims in COVID-19 preprints was 65.4% (this included a successfull replication from my own lab--Sternisko et al) www.nature.com/articles/s41... This is just more evidence that research on COVID was actually quite robust.

PEOPLE WANT CHOICE OVER WHAT THEY SEE ONLINE: *Strong* preferences in our 26-country study for individual ownership of social media feeds, online shopping suggestions, news. People globally prefer individual ownership far more than government or commercial policy oversight. osf.io/preprints/os...

PEOPLE WANT CHOICE OVER WHAT THEY SEE ONLINE: *Strong* preferences in our 26-country study for individual ownership of social media feeds, online shopping suggestions, news. People globally prefer individual ownership far more than government or commercial policy oversight. osf.io/preprints/os...

PREPRINT: Across 26 countries, we find strong preferences for individual ownership of social media feeds, commercial shopping site setup, and other online platforms. Across countries, people prefer individual ownership far more than government or commercial policy oversight. osf.io/preprints/os...

PREPRINT: Across 26 countries, we find strong preferences for individual ownership of social media feeds, commercial shopping site setup, and other online platforms. Across countries, people prefer individual ownership far more than government or commercial policy oversight. osf.io/preprints/os...

Big news from Finnish publication forum. Almost all MDPI and Frontiers journals will be downgraded to level 0 and thus are not considered as properly peer reviewed trustworthy scientific journals. julkaisufoorumi.fi/en/news/chan...

Across multiple studies and many countries, we continue to find no differences in risk-taking or common cognitive biases between economic groups. Specifically, no differences between people had moved upward economically and those that remained low-income. New paper on this coming soon...

Very interesting & consistent with my research with Eesha Sharma and Xiang Wang demonstrating that decisions under scarcity are not inherently less thoughtful or more myopic, but rather driven by attempts to address needs threatened by a lack of responses (JPSP: psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/202...).

What I’ve called the “new new behavioralism” re poverty & cognitive decisions: “We therefore conclude that choices impeded by cognitive biases alone cannot explain why some individuals do not experience upward economic mobility. Policies must combine both behavioral and structural interventions”

In my opinion, we should cite (well-conducted) replications every time we cite the original finding. We should cite it even if the original result replicates. It says a lot that an independent team of researchers is able to find the same effect.

I have doubts about the veracity of this

Positive word to academics: A paper I’ve worked on for years but had extreme difficulty getting published, with some really nasty or unhelpful reviews, has finally been accepted today. If you’ve got a paper like that, the science is solid & you’ve done the work: hang in there, it’ll happen.

Global Collaboration Opportunity: If you are (or know someone) from a country often missed in research, and are interested in a global study on mental health like this one, please write to me! We have many team members in Europe and English-speaking countries, but would love to involve many more!

Across multiple studies and many countries, we continue to find no differences in risk-taking or common cognitive biases between economic groups. Specifically, no differences between people had moved upward economically and those that remained low-income. New paper on this coming soon...

Complexity > risk. Nice. But let's calm down. What about: 1️⃣ Alternative explanations: Isn't this just risk processing with reference points? 2️⃣ The right data: If it's about cognitive load, show me process data. 3️⃣ Replication: More data. + Don't forget @ruggeri.bsky.social's work globalizing PT.

Finally open(ish) access: In a multi-arm study, we find that individuals known as "positive deviants" are significantly better at managing financial decisions (high saving & investing; limited debt & waste). Some unique behaviors, like preference for lump sums, may indicate why. shorturl.at/Rwzdc

A few years ago, we ran a study of temporal discounting in 61 countries. Findings unmistakably indicated that temporal choice anomalies were a global concept, where environment - more so than culture - had significant impacts on country differences. A recent study has extended our work.

Another great resource from @dggoldst.bsky.social!

I think this point by Deborah is key. The data colada team is b-school based and have raised standards for everyone. IMHO this article is well below the standard I expect from the Atlantic.

A few years ago, we ran a study of temporal discounting in 61 countries. Findings unmistakably indicated that temporal choice anomalies were a global concept, where environment - more so than culture - had significant impacts on country differences. A recent study has extended our work.

Behavioral science policy recommendations early in the pandemic were *largely correct*. Our global collaboration of 80+ experts covers 747 studies (average sample size over 16,000!) & supports 16 of 19 claims. Many lessons for science & policy. Out today in Nature: www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Despite what many folks falsely said, research on the pandemic was rock solid: COVID studies were more likely to use stronger designs, larger samples, justify their sample sizes based on power analysis, pre-register their hypotheses and analysis plans + make their data, materials & code available!

This paper by @mariogollwitzer.bsky.social, @stephannuding.bsky.social, @rolandimhoff.bsky.social, et al may become one of the most important of all behavioral science during/since 2020. Psychological research *was no less rigorous* during pandemic; may even have improved some.

Polarization is quite literally killing us. Newest with @jayvanbavel.bsky.social, @ericdknowles.bsky.social, and @sgadarian.bsky.social in @natureportfolio.bsky.social www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Presented research at NYU Psych yesterday and want to credit them for restoring academic engagement. Packed room of 50+, more questions than time, challenging/collegial discussions. No blank zoom screens. Huge faculty + student turnout. We should follow the lead from @jayvanbavel.bsky.social et al.

My wonderful department at Columbia is hiring 3 TT professors in management, health econ, & quant health policy. Positions are for assistant prof or open rank. Salary scale ranges from $120,000 to $260,000. A spectacular place to work! apply.interfolio.com/153883 apply.interfolio.com/134499

Behavioral science policy recommendations early in the pandemic were *largely correct*. Our global collaboration of 80+ experts covers 747 studies (average sample size over 16,000!) & supports 16 of 19 claims. Many lessons for science & policy. Out today in Nature: www.nature.com/articles/s41...

If you have found value in the large-scale studies we carried out through global collaborations in recent years, we will soon share something on a whole new level. A true testament of dedication to scientific rigor from everyone involved - authors, editor, peer reviewers - for the good of society.