Majestic, well done @rickcarlsson.bsky.social

how I feel when open science initiatives choose to publish in Nature

Hey friends, my new paper was just published in JAMA Psychiatry. I draw on biological species classification to sketch a new framework for psychiatric nosology. Brief summary follows below. Full text link: jamanetwork.com/journals/jam... 🧪 #PsychSciSky #MentalHealth

I am hoping to recruit a graduate student for next year. That person would help conduct research on leadership, individual differences, and methodological skullduggery. Please forward to any potentially interested students.

My Shiny app containing 3530 Open Science blog posts discussing the replication crisis is updated - you can now use the SEARCH box. I fixed it as my new PhD Julia wanted to know who had called open scientists 'Methodological Terrorists' :) shiny.ieis.tue.nl/open_science...

I struggle to think of a statistical "method" that has been more damaging to psychology (and related disciplines) than mediation analysis based on observational data. IMHO all such manuscripts should be desk rejected.

This one surely has something on offer for every one: In this cross-sectional mediation analysis, the "effects" of soft drink consumption on depression were "mediated" by abundance of Eggerthela in the gut microbiome. This was sent to me via dm and now you all got to suffer as well.

New blog post! Calculating a correlation is easy enough. But let's say you calculated two of them and they happen to differ. What follows from that? Turns out there are too many moving parts for an easy answer. www.the100.ci/2025/07/28/w...

I feel like psychometrics is uniquely bad at naming things. Parallel, congeneric, tau-equivalent, essentially tau-equivalent measures? Configural, metric, scalar, residual invariance? Item difficulty defined so that the higher the difficulty, the easier the item???

New blog post: Why we should stop using statistical techniques that have not been adequately vetted by experts in psychology daniellakens.blogspot.com/2025/10/why-... where I reflect on how we should check the quality of novel statistical techniques.

Pro tip: When fabricating a dataset, also make several errors in the analysis of the fake data. Then when sleuths point out the errors as well as the fabrication, you can make a more plausible fake dataset when the editor lets you correct the statistical errors "in the interest of fairness".

After a day or two of sleuthing I have realized that a recent (and likely to be very influential) meta-analysis missed 30%-40% of the relevant literature. Do I bother trying to correct the record?

Psych-DS is (1) spellcheck for your datasets and (2) a pathway to standardizing data in our academic fields that *everyone* can learn. And it's live RIGHT NOW! psych-ds.github.io (This is the announcement post I've been leading up to)

This article notes that "Among 40 papers flagged as having issues, he [i.e., me] found 14 false positives (for example, the model stating that a figure referred to in the text did not appear in the paper, when it did)". For background, here are the cases that I believe to be false positives. /0

OSIRIS (Open Science to Improve Reproducibility in Science) is currently conducting several interventional studies on Open Science practices. We invite interested colleagues to register and join a group that may take part in these studies. More info and registration 👇

I will therefore not complain if someone tries to introduce more structure. And so here you go: a decent attempt at methods building from @jamesheathers.bsky.social : jamesheathers.curve.space (Could I have a PDF though? </s>) 2/

Wow, this should be super interesting. Wait, no, that's his book from 2022. Sorry!

I am sorry that you fail to see the benefit of this paper or this type of work, Brett. Read it first, perhaps.

We are excited to announce the review of Lades et al. (2020) "Daily emotional well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic". Based on the review by Joop Adema, we find Moderate Errors which do not affect the core conclusions. We recommend the authors seek a correction error.reviews/reviews/lade...

Hey Quant Folks: Does anyone have any recommendations for testing if two correlation matrices are meaningfully and/or statistically significantly different from each other? NB: In the words of Jeremy Irons: "Please feel free to speak to me as you might to a young child or a golden retriever."

Bluesky has finally reached the maturity that we get the important content

Just thinking, my name sounds Italian enough that I could probably invent a new pasta shape and name it after myself and no one would find it strange.

I understand that there was considerable resistance to the introduction of Risk of Bias tools, but I don't know where to find this discussion, which took place before my entry into the world of research. Any suggestions?

And just like that-academic twitter reformed into academic BlueSky. I’ve missed seeing all this interaction and sharing of science.

Gladwell's latest book includes the below conclusion about who we might target during pandemics (from: www.theguardian.com/books/2024/s...). But the below plot seems to be the main evidence driving this claim, and it's... not very convincing (from: www.pnas.org/doi/epub/10.... )

Join our conference on Open Science and Reproducibility. Keynote by Lakens and @annemscheel.bsky.social , with @nulliusinverba.bsky.social live on stage at the record shop / “folkölscafé” (bar) Mono. opensciencesweden.org/aktiviteter....

Call for commentaries on “Replication value as a function of citation impact and sample size”. We ask the members of the scientific community to provide substantive criticism, interpretation, or elaboration on the article by submitting commentaries to Meta-Psychology. open.lnu.se/index.php/me...

Interested in replication research? Consider writing a commentary for the next special issue in Meta-Psychology which will publish critiques of the article "Replication value as a function of citation impact and sample size": open.lnu.se/index.php/me...

A comparison of vanZwet et al. (Gelman, Goodman) and Schimmack and Bartos's studies of clinical trials in medicine using abstracts and Cochrane reviews. replicationindex.com/2024/01/03/a...

Finally! New policies for Psych Science in 2024 (part 1): Editorial 1: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/psychological_science/vazire-editorial Editorial 2 w/ @tomhardwicke.bsky.social : https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/psychological_science/hardwicke-editorial