Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
briandavidearp's profile
Brian D. Earp
Brian D. Earp
Brian D. Earp
@briandavidearp

Tweets

Brian D. Earp

@briandavidearp

@Yale; @UniofOxford; @hastingscenter; @TheAtlantic - psychology, philosophy of science, bioethics, tech, politics, gender and sexuality, etc. RT ≠ endorsement.

oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp
Joined July 2011

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28

      Brian D. Earp Retweeted Brian D. Earp

      A little mini-thread about the grievance studies hoax, responding to concerns from @ConceptualJames that the emphasis of my initial set of responses may have been in someway misplacedhttps://twitter.com/briandavidearp/status/1056611677251272706 …

      Brian D. Earp added,

      Brian D. Earp @briandavidearp
      Replying to @ConceptualJames
      I took the thrust of your characterization of what you were showing in your hoax to be that there was a special rot in the fields you focused on. To support the claim of a special problem in field X, it is not enough show that, in field X, a small sample of journals of unknown ..
      1 reply 6 retweets 11 likes
    2. James Lindsay‏ @ConceptualJames Oct 28
      Replying to @briandavidearp

      Are you insisting that it's fairly easy for amateurs to get reputable medical journals to publish research that started with a preferred conclusion?

      1 reply 2 retweets 15 likes
      Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
      Replying to @ConceptualJames

      I know that Hypatia is generally well-regarded; I don't know about the others, so I don't have a basis for comparing degree of reputability. But, my goodness, yes, I see shoddy research published by authors with a preferred conclusion published in medicine *all the time*. As for

      11:37 AM - 28 Oct 2018 from Cedar Rapids, IA
      • 8 Likes
      • Justin Caouette Saloni Sturgeon's Law Matt Tontonoz jon BSR Nick McLean
      3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          ... whether they are amateurs: they will often have 2 learn a little about statistics first, or collaborate with someone who can run some of the basic tests; but as I wrote in my thread, the standard way of using stats in medicine & psychology produces loads of type 1 errors ..

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        3. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          ... as 4 Hypatia, however, I take it 1 of co-authors is professional philosopher, so that wouldn't be an amateur. For other journals, if they had novel quantitative methods you had to first learn (to the level of a typical NHST user), might've taken u a bit longer, but not much

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        4. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          ... anyway, I already said in my original tweet that there *may* be an asymmetry in terms of average epistemological rigor required to publish in a top journal in gender studies vs. medicine, but your hoax doesn't show that. Just for a few examples, here is a paper in a ...

          4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        5. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          .. non-prestigious journal pointing out extremely basic methodological and reasoning problems in Translational Psychiatry, published by Nature, by authors with a pretty obvious foregone conclusion https://www.jctres.com/media/filer_public/a4/48/a4482da7-a99a-49bf-848e-9927590a77b7/boyle2017jclintranslres_epub.pdf …

          2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        6. (((theophilus)))‏ @pammalamma Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          But doesn’t the fact that Nature was willing to publish criticism of methods and that the authors were (probably) not accused of being “tools of the right” (and worse) for doing so just demonstrate James’ assertion that the sciences are more self-regulating and falsifiable?

          3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        7. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @pammalamma @ConceptualJames

          "Demonstrate" is a strong word. So no, James's assertion doesn't demonstrate that. Are you suggesting that high-quality journals in feminist philosophy or related areas do not (ever? sometimes? usually?) publish well-thought-out criticisms of their prevailing methods?

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        8. (((theophilus)))‏ @pammalamma Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          I’m saying that if anyone questions feminist journals politically correct ideas, those people will be shunned and labeled as enemies, and that’s exactly what has happened. Helen even posted a quote yesterday saying anyone who questions those ideas is automatically wrong. See it?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. Helen Dale‏Verified account @_HelenDale Oct 28
          Replying to @pammalamma @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          I’m not sure dunking on the rest of the academy to save grievance studies is, ahem, helping. People on my side of the political aisle would cheerfully hack everything in universities except law & STEM into bleeding chunks & chuck it in the Thames. Don’t give them ammunition.

          1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
        10. 3 more replies
        1. New conversation
        2. Mathias Barra‏ @Mathbarra Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          Seriously: are you arguing that it is *not* a problem that ‘shoddy research with a foregone conclusion is published all the time’. If not, how does James’ stunt *not* demonstrate a problem with grievance studies? What you seem to be saying is that medicine, also, is in trouble.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @Mathbarra @ConceptualJames

          Um, no, I am not arguing that. I have devoted much of professional career to calling attention to, and arguing for greater concern to be given to, the scope and degree of shoddy researched published in the fields I am qualified to comment on.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Mathias Barra‏ @Mathbarra Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          What makes one qualified to comment on a field of research, in your opinion? I would say that publishing a number of papers within a field goes a long way towards such qualification? At least it shows a familiarity with the subject?

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        5. End of conversation
        1. Leland USA‏ @lelandusa Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          Shoddy research, yes. Incoherent research, no.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info