In my experience, being able to write coherently about 'research culture' is more important than the reality of a coherent research culture. When it comes to senior management in academia performativity is real and reality is merely symbolic.

Ive been teaching in HE since 2008. Every year at least one ernest undergraduate has told me 'there's no research on [insert topic]'. And, of course, every time they have been dead wrong. I do love a wee academic truism.

Please do sign this - petition.parliament.uk/petitions/73...

Is gender equality in brain damage progress for women and sport??? It's a simple question to ask, and the answer is quite clear and logical, but no one seems willing to take the necessary next steps. Details here 👇 journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

"Social scientific methods are not as they should be." Some chronic problems that i'm pretty sure you've come across are outlined below 👇 and you can read more here - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Academia is... spending all Sunday checking damn hyperlinks on ya CV

Absolutely wholesome interactions between people on what ever level are great to see.

Interrogating the foundations from which good science can flow, allows scholars to see that we all have much in common despite important differences. So I wrote this to capture key elements of *all* (social) science - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

"Social science methods are not as they should be." In this paper I expand my critique of the 'epistemological fictions' that offen sit at the core of thinking & writing in disciplines such as psychology, criminology, sociology and interpretative science more broadly. Please do share 🙏

What to do when local leaders are merely followers? What to do when institutional definitions of success are insipid & amoral? You establish your own vision, a morally defined & defendable path, & measures of success that point to something meaningful. More here 👇 www.nature.com/articles/s41...

What to do when local leaders are merely followers? What to do when institutional definitions of success are insipid & amoral? You establish your own vision, a morally defined & defendable path, & measures of success that point to something meaningful. More here 👇 www.nature.com/articles/s41...

I get that people who think in such uncritical ways will claim to being 'pragmatic'. But they are complicity in making & maintaining education as business (capitalist realism writ large). When clearly it should be understood & engaged with as a social good & thus protected from the profit motive.

I got in trouble at work for speaking too frankly about senior colleagues poor performance. This paper came from my reflections as to the foundations of my thoughts about vacuous 'leadership': www.nature.com/articles/s41...

In my experience moral leadership in contemporary academia is largely absence or symbolic. And the senior scholars that do provide it often have to sit outside of formal power structures. It seems easier to clamber the greasy academic pole if you're a malliable coward rather than a principled leader

Wanna know a bit about my latest book? Here's a discussion: newbooksnetwork.com/doing-good-s...

The often bastardised understanding of reflexivity that seems to play out in much contempory social science as an obsession w/ 'internal' interrogating & biography springs from Western indivialism & an egotistical conception of subjectivity. A richer appreciation of our social nature is an answer.

Reflexivity is an epistemological tool, but if you think it makes you a genuinely critical scholar you're wrong. It's part of what makes you a scholar, but to be critical means going a step further & making reasonable judgements based on evidence as to the rightness or wrongness of the world.

If only I could take headlines such as this one into a time machine, and show them to the science “debunkers”, positivism bashers, and other opponents of objectivist construals of ‘truth’, ‘fact’, and ‘knowledge’ in 1970s and 80s social science and humanities departments… 😔

The scholarly retreat to skeptism when the weight of evidence shows the world to not be right as it is should be understand as unethical and immoral.

A stitch in time saves nine! Thanks to @drcrmatthews.bsky.social for the gift as I prepare to dive into the deep end with my PhD. “The unexamined life isn’t worth living.”

A critical question we should all consider: are we scientists or funding application machines? 👇

When reviewers &/or editors try to push out the creativity from one's writing, I can't help but think their often hackneyed claims to 'academic traditions' are based in a moribund and dour approach to scholarship. The best senior colleagues dont do this, they embrace creativity, flair & personality.

The nonsensical claim the science is or can be value free is actually a position enthused with values: that of status quoing, of conservatism and of a blindness to power relations. As such, youre being overly political and I'd argue immorality conformative to occupy such a place with your work.

Has anyone done research to assess how competent the leaders of universities are in moral, political and social theory, philosophy and action?

I have friends working closely with Ai for all manner of jobs, its quite clear from seeing what they do that university education is done for in its current state. But all I see is colleagues worried about students cheating. Leadership are already 2/3 years behind and the gap will grow exponentially

"Social scientific methods are not as they should be." Some chronic problems that i'm pretty sure you've come across are outlined below 👇 and you can read more here - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Scholars should be able to discuss and debate the morality at the core of their work in similar ways to how they work with data, evidence and claims to truth.

"We ask you to please avoid using coproduction if you are unwilling to read and think deeply about the political, social, moral, and scientific ethos underpinning such work, and to give your ‘academic self’ wholeheartedly to such a project." More 👇 journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Are you teaching methods next year? I wrote this intro with seminars in mind. I think the paper does a good job of introducing epistemology and providing a clear case study of why survey methods are often quite crap. More here - www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

I often read methods sections & feel like the lack of genuine detail as how a scholar came to their interpretations, understandings and ideas felt as if they happened magic. This is the problem of peicemeal discussions of 'how-to guides' to analysis. Lets do better. More 👇

I often think that scholars, and people more broadly, have wonky understandings of the world because they fall into either/or thought. There are numerous examples, & each results in the same thing - overly reductive, simplistic & uncreative thought. It's anathema to good social science. More 👇

I often read methods sections & feel like the lack of genuine detail as how a scholar came to their interpretations, understandings and ideas felt as if they happened magic. This is the problem of peicemeal discussions of 'how-to guides' to analysis. Lets do better. More 👇

Someone who supports my work has paid for 3 books for me to give away! I'll double that - so I have *six* to give away!!! To enter just repost & comment below. I'll announce the winners on friday (1st Aug). Please do share, thanks. 🙏🤟🍻 More info on the book here - www.routledge.com/Doing-Good-S....

"Social science methods are not as they should be." In this paper I expand my critique of the 'epistemological fictions' that offen sit at the core of thinking & writing in disciplines such as psychology, criminology, sociology and interpretative science more broadly. Please do share 🙏

The follow up 'twin paper' is now published 👇. If the first one laid a solid but rather bland foundation, this one zeros in on a much more obvious set of critical issues. I think the opening line is telling - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

As many scholars are using Ai to help w/ their writing, I suggest doubling down on finding your own creative & distinctive style. As Ai 'slop" becomes increasingly obvious your personal, emotionful & idiosyncratic approach will standout & cut through against conformative & boring prose.

Interrogating the foundations from which good science can flow, allows scholars to see that we all have much in common despite important differences. So I wrote this to capture key elements of *all* (social) science - journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Many people, including scholars, have a warped understanding of sport. This means they struggle to develop critical thought and often reproduce myths. We want to put an end to that. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

Those who critique ideological worldviews from a position of 'science' more often than not lack the awareness of science as an ideological worldview and that undermines their understanding of the world. Which, ironically, is anti-scientific.

Its time to retire the phrase "apologies for cross-posting". Life IS cross-posting.

To undermine the fetishism of theory & the epistemologically poor practices that lead to 'pet theories', we need to think *about* & not just *with* theory. The first step is to break it into its component parts & understand that it's a tool & nothing more: www.immersiveresearch.co.uk/bookshop

All social science must 'approach, contact and grasp'. If you think you dont do these things you're wrong and I'd love to help correct that. DM if you wanna discuss how this paper relates to your studies. Cheers 🍻

New one. Its the 2nd of 3 that mark out some very clear foundational issues in qualitative social science. These will be really useful for PhD scholars and early career researchers that are funding their feet. Please do share, comment & ask questions. 🍻 journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

When rejecting formal progression enables your academic contributions to flourish, your passion for scholarship to return and you become the supervisor and colleague you know you want to be, there is a fundamental problem with what is required for formal progression.

Do you know anyone who would like to review my book for an excellent methods journals? If so please tag them or DM me. It would be perfrct for a PhD student. Info on the book here: www.routledge.com/Doing-Good-S....

Do you know anyone who would like to review my book for an excellent methods journals? If so please tag them or DM me. It would be perfrct for a PhD student. Info on the book here: www.routledge.com/Doing-Good-S....

Colleagues, where would you send me to read about the development of Durkheim's discussions of religion? Social theoretical and philosophical debates rather than emprical per se.

Universities - "staff you must tackle student disengagement" Also universities - "here's a 4pm lecture on a Friday, good luck with that"

I'm doing an online seminar tomorrow about myths, science and reality. It will be a nice easy way into epistemology & philosophy of research more broadly. I'm also testing out a new professional head shot, what do you think? #phd #socialscience www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/knowing-st...

I have many failings as a human being. But one of my strengths is that I get shit done, and I'm also good at helping others do the same. So maybe I can help you? 👇 www.immersiveresearch.co.uk/thoughts-and...