iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Congrats my friend - well deserved

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 14/07/2026

Excellent paper on the ethical complexities of Open Science reform. Highly recommend. Builds upon our previous work on epistemic alignment in replication decision making. @suyoghc.bsky.social @balazsaczel.bsky.social @ayeletfishbach.bsky.social

084

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Journal of Mathematical Psychology @mathpsych.bsky.social · 24/06/2026

How does the brain tell correlation from causation across time? Niels Verosky shows one small tweak to a classic associative learning rule lets the same machinery behind temporal difference learning compute causal contingencies, not just co-occurrences.

sciencedirect.com

031

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 30/04/2026

This looks very cool. Thanks for sharing.

120

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Richard D. Morey @richarddmorey.bsky.social · 02/02/2026

New draft: "Decline effects, statistical artifacts, and a meta-analytic paradox". In this manuscript I show how a common practice in meta-analysis (eg the 2015 Open Science Collaboration) creates artifactual signatures of poor scientific behavior. PDF: raw.githubusercontent.com/richarddmore... 1/x

The decline effect (Protzko & Schooler, 2017) is an observed phenomenon where effect sizes in experiments apparently diminish in size from the first paper demonstrating the effect to later replications. This has been taken as a symptom of an unhealthy scientific ecosystem, possibly caused by the "winner's curse" (selection on significance and regression to the mean), publication bias or opportunistic analyses. I show that decline effects can arise as an artifact from a much simpler source: the original article determining the sign of the effect in a meta-analysis. Moreover, such artifactual decline effects will show correlations with some of the same experimental properties that one would expect from biases from poor behavior, such as the sample size of the original study.

78530

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Richard D. Morey @richarddmorey.bsky.social · 25/09/2025

Simonsohn has now posted a blog response to our recent paper about the poor statistical properties of the P curve. @clintin.bsky.social and I are finishing up a less-technical paper that will serve as a response. But I wanted to address a meta-issue *around* this that may clarify some things. 1/x

27931

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Berna Devezer @devezer.bsky.social · 14/08/2025

I love this post about science and metascience. A lot of quotables but I’ll lead with this: “Those seeking a scientific method – one that can be written down and followed mechanically […] – betray a kind of childish impatience with a process they clearly don’t understand.”

2378

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Carl T. Bergstrom @carlbergstrom.com · 12/08/2025

1. "'Trusting the experts is not a feature of either a science or democracy," Kennedy said." It's literally a vital feature of both science and of representative democracy. I've written a fair bit about trust in expertise as a vital mechanism in the collective epistemology of science.

scrippsnews.com

RFK Jr. in interview with Scripps News: ‘Trusting the experts is not science’

HHS Secretary RFK Jr. sat down with Scripps News for a wide-ranging interview, discussing mRNA vaccine funding policy changes and a recent shooting at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

52999042825

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Definitely something worth digging into. I’ll give it some thought

010

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Berna Devezer @devezer.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

here was our call for methodological standards in metaresearch four years ago. instead of getting fixated on a particular inference we'd like to make, we need to maintain scientific standards, do the hard work, respect the evidence. we can't keep jumping at self-serving solutions without question.

share.google

The case for formal methodology in scientific reform | Royal Society Open Science

Current attempts at methodological reform in sciences come in response to an overall lack of rigor in methodological and scientific practices in experimental sciences. However, most methodological ref...

1214

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Berna Devezer @devezer.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

some of the discussion around the p-curve paper is depressing. i still see many missing the point clearly stated in the conclusion, and instead of demanding strong standards or questioning whether they're even asking good questions, they've immediately started asking for replacement methods.

3297

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

I would add that while pcurve is comprised of tests, that indeed correspond to error rates, the actual hypotheses being tested have little to do with “evidential value”

110

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Test statistics being used are just simple sums, no 3rd moment information enters the test.

130

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Would this be grounds for dismissing the remaining 54 studies as lacking value? It makes no sense. Part of the problem is that the original p curve papers aren’t clear on what exactly is being tested. The authors claim they are tests of skew, but this is incorrect as the

130

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 10/08/2025

Happy to clarify. Pcurve is used to test whether a set of studies have (or lack) “evidential value” (which is not really defined). But the actual hypotheses being tested by pcurve don’t permit this, as Richard and I show. Suppose one study WAS underpowered in a set of 55 studies -

110

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

All pcurve tests are just a simple sum of transformed pvalues. There is a fundamental disconnect between the null hypotheses being tested by p-curve and the claims being made.

1152

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

What this means is that a significant result for either test only allows one to claim that “at least one” study (out of the set) doesn’t have the property being considered. Why does this happen? Because pcurve completely ignores the configuration of the pvalues being considered.

160

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

The test for evidential value simply examines whether the effect size is zero for all studies. The test for lack of evidential value tests whether all studies are “underpowered”, I.e., have small non-centrality parameters.

150

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

The developers of p-curve claim that p-curve can be used to make claims about the evidential value (or lack thereof) of whole sets of studies. We show that the actual hypotheses being tested do not allow for such strong conclusions.

140

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

The basic idea of p-curve rests on the idea that the skew of a set of p-values is informative about whether QRPs are occurring. As we show, the p-curve tests have nothing to do with skew. It is trivial to create left skewed pvalues that p-curve would confidently label as right skewed.

1112

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 09/08/2025

New paper with @richarddmorey.bsky.social now out in JASA, where we critically examine p-curve. Below is Richard’s excellent summary of the many poor statistical properties of p-curve (with link to paper). I wanted to add some conceptual issues that we also tackle in the paper.

25120

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Daniel Heck @danielheck.bsky.social · 12/06/2025

New paper by my PhD student @semihaktepe.bsky.social now published 🚀 "Revisiting the effect of discrepant perceptual fluency on truth judgments" tinyurl.com/2eepue5y --> Two experiments & a meta-analysis indicate that high visual contrast does not lead to higher truth judgments.

0143

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 11/06/2025

I'm so sorry this happened to you. There is no excuse for such bs.

140

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Berna Devezer @devezer.bsky.social · 31/05/2025

wherein I'm quoted with "Science is essentially effective to the extent that it can remain independent, decentralized, and democratic." (gift link, email required)

wapo.st

Why Trump’s push for ‘gold-standard science’ has researchers alarmed

Many scientists fear the Trump administration’s new standard means putting political appointees in charge, which could undercut independent research.

38522

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Daniel Heck @danielheck.bsky.social · 28/05/2025

🚀Postdoc position @unimarburg.bsky.social in the project: "Bridging the Gap Between Verbal Psychological Theories & Formal Statistical Modeling with Large Language Models" (funded by @volkswagenstiftung.de) 📅Start: 01.10.2025 | ⏳4 years 🔗 Apply now: uni-marburg.de/jhbCen 🔄 Thanks for sharing!

uni-marburg.de

Postdoc

12823

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Iris van Rooij 💭 @irisvanrooij.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

NEW paper! 💭🖥️ “Combining Psychology with Artificial Intelligence: What could possibly go wrong?” — Brief review paper by @olivia.science & myself, highlighting traps to avoid when combining Psych with AI, and why this is so important. Check out our proposed way forward! 🌟💡 osf.io/preprints/ps...

Table 1
Typology of traps, how they can be avoided, and what goes wrong if not avoided. Note that all traps in a sense constitute category errors (Ryle & Tanney, 2009) and the success-to-truth inference (Guest & Martin, 2023) is an important driver in most, if not all, of the traps.

15345104

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Richard D. Morey @richarddmorey.bsky.social · 15/05/2025

If you'll be at APS2025 in DC next week, I'll be talking about the terrible statistical properties of the p curve procedure in the "Current Issues in Meta-Science" session Saturday, May 24th at 3pm. This will likely be my last US conference in a very long time. A brief summary follows. 1/

Screenshot of the APS program for "Current Issues in Meta-Science", Saturday, May 24, 3:00pm

Titles and authors in the session:

* Statistical Power in the Light of Methodological Reform (Jolynn Pek)

* The Poor Statistical Properties of the P-Curve Procedures (Richard Morey)

* Consistent Methods Protect Against False Findings Produced By p Hacking (Duane Wegener)

* Accumulating Evidence across Studies (Blakeley McShane)

24618

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Daniel Heck @danielheck.bsky.social · 23/04/2025

I am looking forward to expanding the scope of my professorship by combining cognitive and statistical modeling with LLMs😊 There will be two job openings for postdoc positions soon - one starting in September 2025 and another one a year later.

0257

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Berna Devezer @devezer.bsky.social · 21/04/2025

Another reminder that this online event will take place this Friday. I might be alone representing the West Coast (it's at 7am PT) but hope colleagues from other time zones consider stopping by and joining the discussion. My talk will be not-so-subtly titled "Replication Is (Not)".

33714

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

APA Journals @apajournals.bsky.social · 27/03/2025

Special Issue Spotlight: Decision research meets #AI. Read a short summary of the special issue from guest editors Ido Erev, Sudeep Bhatia, and @clintin.bsky.social bit.ly/3FkGX0N

021

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Iris van Rooij 💭 @irisvanrooij.bsky.social · 23/02/2025

Not being anti-fascist at this moment in history is anti-science. Probably always was. But cannot be clearer than these last few weeks.

230451

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Katie Witkiewitz @katiew.bsky.social · 15/02/2025

A visualization I created to share with family and friends about how the NIH indirect rate costs will hurt science AND our economy.

To understand the devastation for U.S. science right now. Here is how NIH grants work:
somebody comes up with a research idea, like a tree sapling
NIH invests in the “direct cost” of that idea, aka buys the sapling
Let’s say that sapling is $100

26436

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Joachim Vandekerckhove 🏖️ @joachim.cidlab.com · 06/02/2025

Since everyone is talking about research funding, this perspective by the vice-president of the European Research Council might be of interest. Blue states: Consider joining a multinational research council.

pnas.org

Alternative models of funding curiosity-driven research | PNAS

Funding of curiosity-driven science is the lifeblood of scientific and technological innovation. Various models of funding allocation became instit...

01710

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Stephan Lewandowsky @lewan.uk · 06/02/2025

My latest column just appeared in Science, entitled "Free speech, fact-checking, and the right to accurate information”. (www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...) I use one of President Trump’s first executive orders to unpack the terrain between misinformation and claims to free speech 1/n

science.org

Free speech, fact checking, and the right to accurate information

True to his campaign promises, on 20 January 2025, US President Donald Trump signed a broad range of Executive Orders, the scope of which ranged from renaming the Gulf of Mexico to “Gulf of America” t...

4231114

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Ayelet Fishbach @ayeletfishbach.bsky.social · 03/02/2025

🚨 New Paper Alert! 🚨 How should scientists decide what to replicate & how? Our latest article explores: 🔍 Book of Truths vs. Book of Conversations – What's the purpose of replication? 📊 Balancing epistemic values, public trust & transparency. www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/... @clintin.bsky.social

pnas.org

PNAS

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) - an authoritative source of high-impact, original research that broadly spans...

022

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Rebecca Sear @rebeccasear.bsky.social · 30/01/2025

Dialogues about the practice of science "In this Feature: Should scientists reform the way they carry out research; if so, how? Should we reform the institutions that currently serve as scientific gatekeepers? How do recent technological & cultural revolutions affect the practice of science?"

pnas.org

PNAS

171

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 29/01/2025

This is heartbreaking. So much great work and people from ORI

010

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 29/01/2025

I interpret much of my own empirical work from a book of conversations perspective. Working on this piece certainly deepened my own understanding of how replication decisions can be made. Hope you enjoy the paper

000

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 28/01/2025

Now out in PNAS, we provide a conceptual framework for assessing replication decisions and replication reform. Do you view the scientific literature as a "book of truths" or a "book of conversations"? www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1... #philsci #science #SciSci #Metascience

pnas.org

PNAS

35113

Reposted by Clintin Davis-Stober

Ayelet Fishbach @ayeletfishbach.bsky.social · 28/01/2025

Which scientific results should be replicated? Our new PNAS suggests the decision depends on whether you subscribe to “the book of truth” or “book of conversation” @pnas.org @clintin.bsky.social

042

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 28/01/2025

Awesome! I’ll be sure to check out your blog post

000

Clintin Davis-Stober @clintin.bsky.social · 28/01/2025

pnas.org

PNAS

35113