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. 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
    2. 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
    3. 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
    4. 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
    5. 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
    6. 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
    7. 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
    8. Nick McLean‏ @Nocmclean Oct 28
      Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

      This is possibly the crucial difference. Science journals may do a bad job of upholding epistomelogical standards. Many disciplines may need to reconsider common practices. But at least science journals aim for an ideal of objectivity, even if it is more honoured in the breach.

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

      There is certainly a difference between succeeding in cheating a system which aims at objectivity and successfully getting a paper which denied objectivity into a system which is just fine with that. The first is inadequate checking. The second is explicit use of bad epistemology

      3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
    10. Nick McLean‏ @Nocmclean Oct 28
      Replying to @HPluckrose @briandavidearp @ConceptualJames

      To concede the point even further, it may be that standards of rigour in certain ostensibly scientific fields may be too lax. (Pysch maybe?) There is a difference between failing to meet certain objective ideals, and openly opposing the whole notion of scientific objectivity.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Brian D. Earp‏ @briandavidearp Oct 28
      Replying to @Nocmclean @HPluckrose @ConceptualJames

      "openly opposing the whole notion of scientific objectivity" has a lot packed into it. It would depend on what the notion of scientific objectivity was that was being invoked, what about it was being opposed, etc. I don't know how to analyze such broad claims

      1:23 PM - 28 Oct 2018 from Cedar Rapids, IA
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. Helen Pluckrose‏ @HPluckrose Oct 28
          Replying to @briandavidearp @Nocmclean @ConceptualJames

          No idea what that means.

          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