Claudio Tennie

@CTennie

Tool cognition & culture in hominoids. STONECULT project. [cumulative culture vs. socially mediated reinnovations; culture-dependent forms vs. latent solutions]

Vrijeme pridruživanja: prosinac 2012.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @CTennie

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @CTennie

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    7. velj 2018.

    Our lab started a new blog ("ZLS blog") - focused on (re-)innovation and social learning. First blog posts are up. Elisa Bandini on reinnovation of scooping and Damien Neadle on reinnovation of food cleaning More to come soon

    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 18 sati

    MEGATHREAD TIME: In 40 tweets I will describe 40 powerful concepts for understanding the world. Some are complex so forgive me for oversimplifying, but the main purpose is to incite curiosity. Okay, here we go:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  3. prije 5 sati

    And even that 50% figure is possibly too high, given also our effect and sample sizes (but yes, exact expectations depend on subfields, questions etc). Compare also with this:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  4. prije 8 sati

    The following is now likely true: If published animal cognition papers are replicated OR newly produced as Registered Reports they should have a rate of ~50% positive findings.... --> if that rate in your own publications is closer to 100%, then I suggest you do this regularly:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  5. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj

    For me personally, 43-50% positive results still sounds like too much. It could be due to the method that gives authors some wiggle room to claim support for hypotheses with disappointing results. Still, it may also mean that the RR format can't completely eradicate all bias 10/

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  6. 6. velj

    Sorry but you all have required reading this morning. Namely, this thread:

    Poništi
  7. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj

    This is amazing, stop what you’re doing and read all of the wonderful thread by !! Registered report have 45-50% of validated hypothesis, vs more than 90% for unregistered papers!!!! So, there you have it: half of all published findings are probably wrong 😢

    Poništi
  8. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj

    I’ve been quiet on here recently because I’ve been working on a number of exciting things. One of which is that and I received the proofs for our book and we are busy proof reading every word! It should be published this Fall

    Poništi
  9. 5. velj
    Poništi
  10. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    4. velj

    Very disturbing to see this lack of scientific nuance from one of the main people responsible for driving US policy & funding toward a mass surgical campaign affecting the genitals of millions of Africans. There are multiple things wrong with this statement ... [THREAD]

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. 4. velj
    Poništi
  12. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    4. velj

    *whispers* this is an argument for writing your own recommendation letters, and letting the referee update/edit them before submission.

    Poništi
  13. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    3. velj

    A lottery grant system seems to be gaining favor. A system where major funding agencies had smaller ($100k) seed grants on a lottery system, and larger ($500k+) grants on a standard system might be a good way to stimulate research and then fund seed projects with support.

    Poništi
  14. 2. velj
    Poništi
  15. 2. velj

    This is how watching any sport feels like to me.

    Poništi
  16. 1. velj

    nothing makes sense except in the light of reputation!

    Poništi
  17. 1. velj
    Poništi
  18. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    1. velj

    Paper just published: Replications in comparative cognition: What can we expect and how can we improve?

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. 1. velj

    This would make a lot of sense to me - it always seemed a weird effect to begin with.

    Poništi
  20. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. kol 2019.

    One of the best ways to win arguments is to be so completely wrong that there's no way anyone could feasibly correct you without teaching three entry level college courses in the process. This is known colloquially as a "Shapiro."

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. 28. sij
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·