Why don't you include the attachments? Particularly "Attachment 3"?
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @JoyfulSisyphean @peterboghossian
I’d be curious to know, too, how the investigating committee interpreted the violation against human subjects research rules.
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likes -
It was probably such a slam dunk that he's embarrassed to show it.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @schubert_albert @gorskon and
If it is a slam dunk, it should be pretty obvious. So, what is your guess?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DorianGray321 @schubert_albert and
The study depended on active participation by people who were not being informed about and therefore could not opt out of being used for the study. That’s a serious ethics violation on top of the fact that they didn’t even ask for ethics approval from the relevant ethics board.
2 replies 0 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @Katja_Thieme @DorianGray321 and
Correct. Also, there was no post-study debriefing of the subjects, which is pretty much mandatory for any study involving deception of the subjects.
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @Katja_Thieme and
It was so predictable you would come with this BS argument...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
And it's so predictable that Boghossian's fans would refuse to learn about human subjects research regulations and continue to argue from a position of profound ignorance.
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.