The point of research and the scientific method is to be self-critical, open to revision, and reflective. This might mean taking a closer look at the methodologies of prior studies with fresh eyes. As an evolutionary psychologist it seems like that should be clear to you?
The leading psychology society, @PsychScience, is caving in to woke demands to disavow a published journal paper by @ImHardcory, @EPoe187, & @azimshariff, just because they don't like its conclusions.
Let them know how you feel about that.
The paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797619897915 …https://twitter.com/PsychScience/status/1271494967257677830 …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If by “woke” you mean “aware of the historical development of research methods and the ability to identify a racist agenda poorly disguised as science” then yes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why block a reasonable critique?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There seem to be many fundamental methodological flaws with this paper, thus it seems only fair that it receives criticism. How can you be against that as a scientist?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems fine to me. What’s the big deal?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Some of us are pointing out serious methodological and statistical problems that render the conclusions at best ambiguous. Highly disingenuous to dismiss this scientific critique as “woke demands” about the conclusions rather than just ordinary scientific re-evaluation.
-
Carefully engaging with a paper, critiquing it on logical and empirical grounds... Outrageous...it MUST be a politically motivated attack...the IDW are basically postmodernists now and critical treatment of their views can always dismissed as political... for them fuck the facts
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
If the findings were consistent in both studies then I don’t understand on what basis
@PsychScience are questioning the process. Again, it looks like a case of them not liking the findings and trying to conjure up a way of pushing it under the rug. -
Reliability is not validity. The findings are based on the same data, which to be blunt looks as racist AF. Kenya allotted an IQ of 72, Malawi 60, while Singapore & Hong Kong are 108. From the articles, the tests don't correct for local intelligence or lack of access to schools m
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
why did you close the Marketplace of Ideas™ to
@wgervais when he raised issues with the methodology?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.