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
    3. 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

      3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes
    4. 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
    5. 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
    6. 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
    7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
      Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

      It's not a secret. They're publishing things saying we need to get beyond evidence and reason and publishing pieces consistent with that criteria. It's not bad papers sneaking through a system which claims to be evidence-based. Its a system which doesn't claim to be.

      2 replies 10 retweets 49 likes
    8. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
      Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

      This is what we are pointing out. We can't compare this to science unless science journals are also claiming that knowledge rooted in science and reason are masculinist & imperialist constructs & publishing papers based on positional experience as a neglected epistemology.

      2 replies 1 retweet 15 likes
      Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
      Replying to @HPluckrose @ConceptualJames

      Helen I appreciate ur measured way of communicating we me. I do think there r problems in aspects of epist. behind a good deal of work in gender studies. Epist. probs. in psych.etc. r often different, but still quite deep & bad, if perhaps less overtly make-fun-of-able by critics

      12:29 PM - 28 Oct 2018 from Cedar Rapids, IA
      • 1 Like
      • Mathias Barra
      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        1. New conversation
        2. Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @HPluckrose @ConceptualJames

          If you'd like to do a Skype conversation with me sometime where we talk about this stuff in proper detail, I'd be very happy to do that. I unfortunately can't spend much more time on Twitter today because I've got some pressing deadlines. Let me know if you'd like to do a chat?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          I think I have made the claims we are and are not making clearer now? If not, have a look at the discussion bit of the Areo piece where we talk about what it can be said to show and cannot be said to show.

          0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. End of conversation
        1. New conversation
        2. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          I don't doubt this. I don't know it to be true either. I do know that showing a problem to exist in my own area of study should not be taken as a claim that no other types of problems exist in any other studies but that's what this keeps getting derailed to.

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

          It's not that u claimed that "no other types of problems exist in any other studies." It's rather that the way u & ur co-authors framed much discussion of ur hoax (that I read) was there was a *special* problem, i.e., compared to other fields. But ur hoax doesn't show *that.*

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          I still don't know what you're talking about. This is tautological. We are claiming that there is a special epistemological & ethical problem with using certain kinds of theory and then we looked at journals from various fields which did use it & got them to publish the problems

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          Critical theory rooted in postmodernism is a special problem. It can only be tested where it exists. If we tried to send a Butlerian argument about the construction of masculinity to a physics journal, they'd say it was out of scope & refer us to journals which used Butler.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        6. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          In the same way, someone wanting to show that some bad ideas about dietary fat are being perpetuated to harmful effect, this is a special problem within a specialty. They'd have to send to journals which covered dietary fat & not to journals which didn't. Why isn't this clear?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        7. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

          If we'd said "Only gender studies use this theory," we'd need to have a control but we didn't limit in that way. We sent papers to the top journals we could find who were open to this kind of theoretical work. That's why we have one in geography.

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        8. End of conversation

      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