iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 12h

Still upset about that highly cited paper in Psych Science you consider deeply flawed? Now is your time to shine ✨

67829

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 13h

I wish all emails that were automatically generated would expect me not to reply ...

170

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 13h

I HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO AS WELL !!

130

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Omid V. Ebrahimi @omidvebrahimi.bsky.social · 15h

⚡ Out now: Psychological and health sciences increasingly study how phenomena dynamically influence and reinforce one another over time: for example, to understand the mechanisms maintaining mental disorders. Can we identify reliable clusters of these dynamics? A thread 🧵 osf.io/preprints/ps...

23815

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 13h

OMID, NOT MORE THAN THREE PAPERS PER WEEK PLEASE !!

280

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 14h

Brilliant, wonderful news, congratulations Madeleine!!

000

Reposted by Eiko Fried

simine vazire @simine.com · 15h

Another special issue at Psych Science! We invite “submissions that advance the field through critical appraisal of articles previously published by Psychological Science” Please share! www.psychologicalscience.org/publications...

psychologicalscience.org

Special Issue Call for Submissions: “Appraising the Foundations of Psychological Science”

Editors: Tom Beckers and Heather UrryOne way a journal can earn its reputation for quality is to take active steps to vet the articles that appear within its pages after publication. To that end, Psyc...

58649

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 20h

As I say above, super cool work, but of course that is not a realistic assumption. But you lay the foundation here and future studies can dig into this further. I hope lots of people will take this seriously and work on this challenge, following your template here!

020

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 20h

What are all the reasons for people not reporting a stressor other than there not being a stressor? Is everybody equally good at detecting and acknowledging stressors (which ties into, among other things how good people are at self-perceiving their own stress)? Etc

230

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 20h

Brilliant study Jonas et al—really wonderful idea and great execution. I feel like this one particular tweet above is the strongest of the assumptions in the paper, and I'm sure you also critically discuss the assumption in the paper. So I'd love future research to focus on this more.

130

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Lukas Gunschera @lukasgunschera.com · 06/10/2026

Addiction has become the default framework for interpreting problematic social media use. It shapes how it is measured, discussed, regulated, and what support young people are offered. But does it match the experiences of young people who report feeling addicted to social media? 🧵(1/7)

35524

Reposted by Eiko Fried

James Balamuta @coatless.bsky.social · 04/10/2026

webrarian is a new R package. It turns a folder of R scripts and data into a static website where R runs in the visitor's browser, with no compute server and nothing to install. blog.thecoatlessprofessor.com/posts/introd... #rstats #webr #webassembly

A card for the R package webrarian. Large text reads "A folder in. A website out." On the left, a small card lists a folder named lab-01 holding lab.R, setup.R and a data folder. A red arrow points from it to a browser window that shows a scatterplot of car weight against miles per gallon with brick-red points. The address coatless-wasm.github.io/webrarian is on the card.

516166

Reposted by Eiko Fried

David Ho @davidho.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

But I also said this: “It says a lot about MDPI that they published it in the first place, and it says even more about the quality of the paper that MDPI eventually retracted it.”

233915

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

woohoooo congratulations Crystal !!

010

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Crystal Lewis @cghlewis.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

I'm not crying, you're crying. 🥹 So grateful to have received this from the POWER (Providing Opportunities for Women in Education Research) leadership team.

7892

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

Nothing like sending yourself an empty email to remind you of ... something ... ?

3390

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Chaz Firestone @chazfirestone.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

pouring one out for mturk today

“Amazon Mechanical Turk will permanently close on September 30, 2026.”

210513

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

At my Institut, faculty have around 1250euro per year, which is not sufficient for most international conferences. I was lucky to obtain grant funding which helps pay for my conferences.

010

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

Went to SAA 4 years in a row now and really enjoyed it. Very methodsy, early career crowd, lots of good energy. But focused on EMA / wearables, of course, so not general. IMPS has gotten a lot better, really worth checking out. And SIPS is da best <3

2110

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Joshua Goodman @joshua-goodman.com · 30/09/2026

Our "A Few Goodmen" paper now has some serious competition, coming from the many Katherines of the world. arxiv.org/pdf/2404.00732

8658

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

"[AI company CEO] defendants claim they cannot stop barreling forward with their potentially civilization-ending endeavors unless they are forced to do so by the government. Plaintiff brings good news to the Defendants."

0152

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Totally ok to get help from senior PHD, preferably faster than 3 weeks given how long this MS has been taken. Thanks for considering Hannah, I'll inv you (no hard feelings if not possible)

010

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Did Amy say she is interested?

100

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Hey friends, trying to find a reviewer who could provide a review on an empirical EMA paper focused on emotion regulation. I've had 31 declines so getting a little desperate and feel really bad for the authors. Let me know here or per email (firstnamesecondname@gmail.com)

81115

Reposted by Eiko Fried

ProPublica @propublica.org · 26/09/2026

Hey, ProPublica reporter Jake Pearson here. I’m taking over the account to tell you about my new story. For months, I posed as a problem gambler on DraftKings to test the company's "responsible gaming" safeguards. Spoiler alert: They made me a VIP — and I lost $10K. Here's how it all went down. 🧵

Selfie taken by ProPublica reporter Jake Pearson, a man wearing a backwards baseball cap and an orange T-shirt.

19596013538

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Kimberly Quinn 🇨🇦 @kimberlyquinn.bsky.social · 27/09/2026

"It is time to stop applauding endurance as a solution. True institutional strength comes not from the capacity of individuals to survive, but from systems that are designed to support, rather than exploit, their communities."

timeshighereducation.com

It’s time to stop celebrating resilience

When universities ask their staff to do more with less, is it really a test of individual fortitude? Rachelle McKay explains why we should stop praising endurance

0176

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

Very interesting work, & nice to see how stable effects are from week 6 to week 14 (if I understood '2 months follow-up' correctly). Wonder what implications this has for what we think neuroticism is and how we measure it. Also wondering about temporal measurement invariance / response shift bias.

1120

Reposted by Eiko Fried

John Stott @jpsastro.bsky.social · 24/09/2026

Had a UKRI funded grant proposal rejected at the "AI triage stage". "This AI-based triage was used only to identify approximately 50% of the strongest proposals to take forward to full human review." 🧪 #academicsky

I am writing to let you know that, unfortunately, your application was not successful.

Review process

As part of the initial triage of the 179 proposals submitted to this call, each was assessed using an AI-based review. Every proposal was read independently by several different AI models against the same seven criteria used to shape this call (including cyber security relevance, research quality and novelty, importance of the problem addressed, feasibility of the project plan, likely outputs and impact, value for money, and responsible research practice), with each model asked to give a score and a written justification with supporting quotations from the text. To guard against any one model's idiosyncrasies, we also ran a second, independent process in which different AI models debated the merits and weaknesses of each proposal before reaching a judgement, again against the same criteria. Scores from both processes were combined to produce an overall ranking.

This AI-based triage was used only to identify approximately 50% of the strongest proposals to take forward to full human review. Projects selected for funding were drawn from those that progressed to the full human review stage. We recognise that AI-assisted assessment is a new and evolving part of the review process, and we are continuing to evaluate how well it aligns with the judgements of human reviewers on this call. We will soon produce a document detailing our method, so that others can build upon it and improve it.

Feedback on your application

Your application was not selected to progress beyond the AI triage stage. To provide transparency on the outcome of this assessment, we are sharing below the scores (out of 5) from each of the two AI review processes described above, together with the mean score across the two processes.

40435241

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Adela Isvoranu @adelaisvoranu.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

I've been noticing that “cross-sectional” has become shorthand for “methodologically weak” in (network) research, and often data being cross-sectional is treated as a methodological objection in itself. I took some time to put my thoughts down in writing. Pre-print: osf.io/preprints/ps... 🧵⬇️

osf.io

OSF

2267

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

298 citations for a 2025 paper? That's a crazy amount of citations in psychology Paul ...

120

Reposted by Eiko Fried

moin syed @syeducation.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

New paper! Despite qualitative researchers claiming that generalizability is not a goal, their published work does indeed contain generalizable claims. We document this and provide recommendations for how all researchers can better calibrate their generalizability claims. doi.org/10.1177/2515...

article header for, "Qualitative Researchers Can and Do Generalize: Generalizability Claims in Qualitative Psychological Research". Metascience!

619258

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Micah G. Allen @micahgallen.com · 22/09/2026

Sol passed all attention checks with ease, and produced more than 40 trials of believable discrimination and confidence behavior.

1111

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 21/09/2026

I talked to multiple friends about this polyhedron yesterday night excitedly, and even printed the instructions to make it out of paper. I cannot believe I wake up this morning and there is a little rotation app on it XD. This is what I'm here for!

280

Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 19/09/2026

I got 450 applications for a PhD position a month ago and don’t believe it was a badly written call. The problem was that 400 of these applicants didn’t meet the “required” skill set at all. 300 had little to nothing to do with the position or call.

130

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Dan Quintana @dsquintana.bsky.social · 19/09/2026

New preprint! 🎉 I analysed 1660 papers from 4 psychology journals and found materials sharing went from 9% of papers in 2015 to 82% in 2025, and these materials *do* get downloaded — a median of 135 times each. BUT shared code is often hard to run. doi.org/10.31234/osf... Let's walk through it 🧵

Two-panel figure. Panel a is a flow diagram tracking 1,611 empirical psychology articles from publication year (545 in 2015, 552 in 2020, 514 in 2025) to repository-link type: 785 link an OSF project, 85 link another platform, and 741 link no repository. Of those with an OSF link, download counts were retrieved for 670 and not retrieved for 115. Panel b is a line chart of the share of empirical papers linking OSF across 2015, 2020 and 2025. The overall rate, shown as a dashed black line, rises from 9% to 57% to 82%. All four journals rise steeply and end close together: Psychological Science 92%, JESP 89%, JML 83%, Cognition 76%, with Psychological Science highest throughout.

Three-panel figure. Panel a: ridgeline plot of downloads per file by material type on a log scale, with the percentage never downloaded labelled for each — archive 16% of 545 files, documents 20% of 2,970, code 12% of 3,471, other 17% of 1,646, data 21% of 10,051, media 35% of 2,120, images 35% of 4,102. Most files cluster between 1 and 10 downloads, with long right tails past 100. Panel b: ridgeline plot of downloads per paper by journal, log scale, with dashed median lines; Psychological Science is highest, then JESP, JML and Cognition. Panel c: stacked bars showing, for documents, data and code separately, the share of papers by download band (0, 1–10, 11–100, more than 100) in 2015, 2020 and 2025. The share exceeding 100 downloads falls sharply over time in all three types, from roughly two-thirds in 2015 to a quarter or less in 2025, as the 1–10 band grows.

Four-panel figure. Panel a: statistical languages detected among 333 papers with retrievable code — R 88%, SPSS 12%, Stata 4%, SAS 1%. Panel b: code red flags among those 333 papers — 34% hard-code an absolute path, 40% reference a missing file — above documentation among 672 OSF-linked papers — 21% have a README, 30% are documented by README, description or wiki. Panel c: among 562 Elsevier papers with no repository link, 44% (245) host at least one journal supplementary file but only 14% (77) host data, code or an archive. Panel d: composition of those 448 hosted files — documents 52%, data 21%, media 9%, other 7%, archive 6%, code 3%, images 1%. The code panels are green, the journal-supplement panels blue.

Coefficient plot (download predictors)

Dot-and-whisker plot of three standardised predictors of OSF download volume, each with a 95% confidence interval. Repository size (number of files) has the largest effect at about 0.76, citations about 0.38, and altmetric attention about 0.12. All three intervals sit entirely above zero, so each predicts more downloads, with repository size roughly twice the effect of citations and six times that of attention. X-axis: standardised effect, −0.2 to 1.0.

4265113

Reposted by Eiko Fried

Andrea Howard @drandreahoward.bsky.social · 18/09/2026

New paper from me, out soon in Behavior Research Methods: I'm a lil bit obsessed with good online recruitment and the result is this side-quest paper that made use of data we had collected that recruited people online in three ways (met them on Zoom, validated their email, and Prolific). 🧵>>

35618