Sign in

Hauke Roggenkamp

@hroggenkamp.bsky.social
39 followers 130 following 13 posts
PostsRepliesMedia
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Having said that, I think that a good documentation is key (see also academic.oup.com/view-large/f...), which is why this README template might be a good starting point (...and Claude Code can help adapt it) social-science-data-editors.github.io/template_REA... Happy to chat about your project!
social-science-data-editors.github.io
A template README for social science replication packages.
The template README provided on this website is in a form that follows best practices as defined by a number of data editors at social science journals.
110 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
Thanks! Thanks! It's on my list, but I am not quite sure whether a single model repo may be sensible, especially since demands can vary a lot (even within disciplines).
111 1
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Sharon Machlis @smachlis.bsky.social · 17/09/2026
Quarto 2 will be 100 times faster than the current edition. You can try an early beta, but as of now it only does HTML output and can't run code yet. It'll be "about a year of work" before Posit advises users to move to Q2, @cscheid.net told #PositConf2026. github.com/quarto-dev/q2 #QuartoPub
github.com
GitHub - quarto-dev/q2: q2 is the experimental implementation of Quarto 2 in Rust.
q2 is the experimental implementation of Quarto 2 in Rust. - quarto-dev/q2
1274 27
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Institute for Replication @i4replication.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
1/ What is the prevalence of personally identifiable information (PII) in author-collected data publicly shared in the social sciences? We audited 327 replication packages from 11 leading journals in economics, political science, and psychology Answer: surprisingly high 🧵
25537 55
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Richard McElreath 🐈‍⬛ @rmcelreath.bsky.social · 04/09/2026
It's a systemic problem in science reporting that these summaries exaggerate the evidence. In the actual candy study, the participants were all students, status was manipulated in the lab by telling some students they were better than others, and "nearly twice" means 1 piece vs 2 pieces.
Piff and his colleagues found that upper-class drivers were more likely to cut other cars off at junctions and ignore pedestrians at crossings. Wealthier people also appeared more willing to lie at work. In one experiment, volunteers were left alone with a jar of sweets ostensibly meant for children. When the researchers returned, upper-class people had snaffled nearly twice as many candies as lower-class people.
1329166 291
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Ana Martinovici @anamartinovici.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
I would say anyone who is a co-author, regardless of how Ariely was involved in the project.
011 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
We couldnt publish comments OA and have a 6-month embargo, unfortunately. Until then, we only have that read-only and not-downloadable 😬 But afterwards, we plan to release it.
120 2
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
Two years ago @mvreiss.bsky.social and I reproduced a paper for @i4replication.bsky.social's mass reproduction project. It reproduced cleanly, and we still came away seeing how fragile these pipelines can be: a hard-coded path, an updated package, an undocumented manual step. Hence this Comment.
1105 10
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Andrew Gelman et al. @statmodeling.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
I am shocked, shocked to learn that this 2002 paper by Dan Ariely is based on dubious data and doesn’t replicate. statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2026/08/31/s...
statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
I am shocked, shocked to learn that this 2002 paper by Dan Ariely is based on dubious data and doesn’t replicate. | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
26421 64
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Beth Clarke @bethclarke.bsky.social · 21/08/2026
I’m hiring a PhD student to work with me on metascience in psychology at @zpid.bsky.social! The position is very open - could cover a wide range of topics/themes 🤸🏻‍♀️✨ If you have questions, please reach out! Applications are open until October 1st. leibniz-psychology.onlyfy.jobs/en/job/fyjwt...
leibniz-psychology.onlyfy.jobs
PhD in Psychological Meta-Science (m/f/d)
Become part of the open science movement The Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information (ZPID) in Trier (Germany) is an internationally recognized research-based psychology service center located in...
36157 61
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 19/08/2026
And there is also this amazing review: www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
aeaweb.org
The Economics of Social Media
(December 2024) - We provide a guide to the burgeoning literature on the economics of social media. We first define social media platforms and highlight their unique features. We then synthesize the m...
110 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 19/08/2026
Sounds amazing! This paper reports a field experiment (using a browser extension that filters toxic content) which suggests that toxic content is engaging (a bit like the negativity bias). www.econstor.eu/handle/10419...
econstor.eu
Making sure you're not a bot!
110 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 24/06/2026
We also discussed literate programming the other day. Could help wrt traceability but may hurt computational reproducibility.
000 0
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 24/06/2026
Would it make sense to add something about null results and file drawers? And are topics such as small statistical significance thresholds open science or good practice?
000 0
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Colin Camerer @cfcamerer.bsky.social · 15/06/2026
NEW great progress from @i4replication.bsky.social in automating reproducibility "The Engine executes code, flags numerical mismatches, raises possible implementation issues, and proposes robustness checks, but leaves the substantive judgments to people" www.i4replication.org/blog/the-ai-...
graph showing that LLMs in a replication Engine work well
041 4
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Quentin André @quentinandre.bsky.social · 31/05/2026
New blog post: Make Your Papers Legible to Machines (They’re Already Reading) quentinandre.net/posts/legibl...
061 6
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 12/03/2026
I can't stop thinking about this. Imagine: - 2200 studies, as they say >2000 - 2 studies per article given piloting/multi-study articles - No p-hacking (lol); 1 test per study (lol), 5% False Positive Rate That's 55 significant studies that are false positives Actual publications: 64
33810 38
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Josh Grubbs @joshuagrubbsphd.com · 12/03/2026
I can’t decide if the file drawer or the absolute poverty of methodological effort it takes to run 2,000 MTurk studies is more concerning to me
2212 21
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Ana Martinovici @anamartinovici.bsky.social · 10/03/2026
“We wanted to create a way to celebrate those who have the courage to admit when they’ve made a mistake [...] Correcting the record shouldn’t be seen as a failure, but as a vital part of the scientific process. This award is about recognizing the integrity it takes to prioritize truth over ego”
022 2
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 13/02/2026
About two years ago, John Lynch made a broader point that I think also applies here: we are shamefully heuristic.
110 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 08/10/2025
Wird aber anders geschrieben—was vielleicht ein erstes Indiz dafür ist, dass es gar nicht so leicht ist
110 1
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 07/10/2025
Pädagogig? 🫩
100 1
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 03/06/2025
Academia will form these little pockets -- people whose theorizing is outrageous & supported by methods outdated since the 90s -- but once it reaches a critical size those people just review each others papers & grants, form societies, hand out awards etc, like a self-contained parallel society.
2645989 459
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Dean Eckles @eckles.bsky.social · 21/03/2025
Mediation analysis or "three correlations in a trench coat"
0234 23
Reposted by Hauke Roggenkamp
Andrew Heiss @andrew.heiss.phd · 20/03/2025
I’ve long used FiveThirtyEight’s interactive “Hack Your Way To Scientific Glory” to illustrate the idea of p-hacking when I teach statistics. But ABC/Disney killed the site earlier this month :( So I made my own with #rstats and Observable and #QuartoPub ! stats.andrewheiss.com/hack-your-way/
Screenshot of the linked Quarto website, with input checkboxes to change different conditions for a regression model that predicts economic performance based on US political party, with a reported p-value
571468434 1.5K
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 22/01/2025
www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/706046...
penguinrandomhouse.com
Tyranny of the Minority by Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt: 9780593443095 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • A call to reform our antiquated political institutions before it’s too late—from the authors of How Democracies Die “[Levitsky and Ziblatt] write with...
020 2
Hauke Roggenkamp @hroggenkamp.bsky.social · 16/01/2025
I am wondering how to define _theory_ but what about numerical cognition and lonely numbers? Apparently, one can come up with studies indicating that lonely people dislike prime numbers as they are not connected to other numbers. Hence, I’d rather pay 12 instead of 11 dollars.
000 0