Ah — gotcha!
-
-
Wouldn't that be lovely. Sometimes it is nice to be wrong.
-
There is a large movement in ev psych to improve research etc. Here are a bunch of recent large-scale replication studies from our lab, for ex https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/10/25/136549 … https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/09/14/136515 … https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/06/26/155788 …https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/12/13/156430 …
-
All with
#opendata, code etc. There has been a lot of discussion in the ev psych lit about how to improve methods, particularly in the more contentious areas (eg links between hormones and mating psychology). -
As for people working in the area not calling out others in public for doing bad work, here I am criticising that awful sexual orientation and facial appearance paper http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41188560 …
-
Also worth pointing out that the journal Evolution and Human Behavior (
@EvolHumBehav) - arguably the main journal in the field - requires data be published. I don’t know of any social psych journals that require that. -
Thanks for sharing this info. Good to know about. I do think much of these good science practices are orthogonal to the conceptual issues that I was trying to get at. Would you agree?
-
That point started here in the thread:https://twitter.com/irisvanrooij/status/942026648093970432 …
-
Perhaps my comment about social psychology suggested my point was re: replication issues etc. Those are very important too, of course, but not at core of the conceptual problems I see with gender research that conceptualizes gender/sex as binary & sexuality as heteronormative.
- 21 more replies
New 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.


