The sad truth is — like the meme above directly states — MANY PEOPLE literally ignore theoretical work in cogsci/psych. 
-
-
So like those essays will be written all the time because in part people do not listen/read/whatever, I guess. In a sense the essays are needed to be written because they are needed to be read but I doubt that final step happens.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Regardless, that essay should have talked more about people who do the good work. Credit where credit is due.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I was also surprised by Denny’s take because I recall his own work is quite theoretical and model-based.https://dennyborsboom.com
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Perhaps he's basically trying to say "this is the path to take" — but forgot to say "others walk it already"?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Iris van Rooij Retweeted Iris van Rooij
Did not read his message that way even though I had a strong prior that that is what he was going to say:https://twitter.com/irisvanrooij/status/1013144411386064896?s=21 …
Iris van Rooij added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @o_guest and
Perhaps it was strategic that he left it implicit. But I see discussion here on twitter about how psychology is not ready for / has no good theoretical work etc. & this feeds into that.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @o_guest and
It seems that experimental (social) psychologists often think of ‘theory’ = ‘trying to sell bad research practices’. At least, that is the impression I get if I raise the isue of ‘theory’ in convos. I need to think of different words ...
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
Agreed. It's painful to read that but it's what they say IMHO.
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.