Emir Efendic

@EmirEfen

Psych researcher. Judgment, Decision Making. RT = Hey look at this! Tweets go up to 11🎛️🎙️

Maastricht, Netherlands
Vrijeme pridruživanja: srpanj 2014.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @EmirEfen

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

  1. prije 7 sati

    Staying home to wait for a package delivery seems peak anthropocene.

    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    28. sij

    Journal: Ready to submit your manuscript? Me: Yup! (cracking my knuckles) Journal: Do you have all these ready? 1. Your login details 2. Your ORCID ID 3. Manuscript 4. Each image as separate file 5. Cover letter 6. COI for each author 7. Author signatures for all

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  3. 28. sij

    That feeling when you realise an email about your paper is just spam and not someone being actually interested...

    Poništi
  4. 26. sij

    A nice paper on the problem in psych. Makes me think of language capabilities of researchers as a caveat. I select US & UK samples cause my English is good enough to write precise manipulations.

    Poništi
  5. 22. sij

    I'm proud that we also pre-registered our predictions for all but one study; everything is open ; and the pre-print is here: Thanks again to & . We now await the algorithm's retaliation.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  6. 22. sij

    Finally, it seems that the reliance on response time as a cue is stronger if people don't know much about the prediction task. In one study, people from the US (who don't know much about English football) relied on response time more to judge prediction quality from an A.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  7. 22. sij

    Also, for Hs, response time seems to be a highly evaluable cue as it appears bet-sub and with-sub, while it seems people need some experience with an A, for the relation to stick...

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  8. 22. sij

    It is a curious asymmetry. So what's the reason? Well, slow response times signal more effort for both A and H...but the relation between effort and quality breaks down for A because people think prediction is easy for As, but difficult for Hs.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. 22. sij

    In this 9 (read them, nine) study paper, we show that response time differently affects how people judge predictions made by algorithms (A) vs. humans (H). Generally slow A predictions = bad, but slow H predictions = good

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. 22. sij

    New publication! Ever gotten some advice from an ? Just accepted in OBHDP! "Slow response time undermines trust in algorithmic (but not human)" predictions w/ & Really proud of this one. Let me explain👇

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    21. sij

    Our main finding: In all these countries, participants were most likely to sacrifice in Switch, then in Loop, then in Footbridge. Universality of Switch-Loop-Footbridge suggests differences are best explained by basic cognitive processes, rather than cultural norms.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    13. sij

    I really like this paper - even though there are no flashy results, we have cool moral dilemmas in three languages, 2x2x2x2 design with a large sample and during the last R&R I learned that Kant was something of an antivaxer ,)

    Poništi
  13. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    13. sij

    Our paper on wording effects in moral judgment with and is now published:

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    It's disappointing to see an article about misconduct for which I was consulted stating that 3 experts took a look at the data, but only mentions 2 of them by name. Those 2 are both men. I am not mentioned. One of the 100s of little insults have to deal with.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    8. sij

    The next Society for Risk Analysis-Europe Benelux conference takes place in Eindhoven on March 24. More information and the call for abstracts (deadline January 17th) can be found on

    Poništi
  16. 8. sij

    A lot of these are probs joke answers, but there are clusters and the fact that one is obviously on the Balkans is just 👌👌!

    Poništi
  17. 7. sij

    A good observation. Choosing the delayed larger reward is often a privilege in real life. We write about immediate choices as bad instances of impatience when in fact it could be the most optimal choice given person/situation.

    Poništi
  18. 4. sij

    I’ve so rarely come across so many instances of groupthink as in science. What is it that makes scientists so wedded to their theories? This example in Alzheimer’s research seems really odious.

    Poništi
  19. 2. sij

    Often, similarities between groups of people are disregarded. This nice paper highlights the extent of the similarities nicely:

    Poništi
  20. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    I made an app that shows ggplot2 code & plot. Hopefully useful for learning/teaching/understanding ggplot2. The app lives here:

    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:

    ·