Sign in

Lukas Jung

@lhdjung.bsky.social
2.4K followers 1.2K following 202 posts

PhD student in psychological metascience at Uni Bern | R package developer – {scrutiny}, {unsum}, and more | github.com/lhdjung | lhdjung.com | forensic metascience | error detection | missing value handling | #rstats

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Jamie Cummins @jamiecummins.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
I sincerely hope this paper will be seen as a turning point in how the medical sciences think and approach the issue of trustworthiness assessment (and I hope the social sciences follow suit!). Congrats to @jdwilko.bsky.social and colleagues (incl. @ianhussey.mmmdata.io and @lhdjung.bsky.social)!
12210
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Sanjay Srivastava @sanjaysrivastava.com · 16/09/2026
Fully expecting this to be based on a tiny self-selected sample predisposed to aggression, with participants coached on how to act, exaggerated performances for observers, all run by a host with a flair for showmanship but questionable ethical instincts. You know, a direct replication
723240
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Jamie Cummins @jamiecummins.bsky.social · 10/09/2026
Machine learning and generative LLMs are subject to many of the same drawbacks and issues as general empirical research in the typical publishing system. In this piece now published at NHB we argue that, like for empirical research, ML and LLMs can benefit from the use of Registered Reports.
02210
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 18/08/2026
"Can a program that works in one school district succeed nationwide? That's the generalizability problem" That's an *instance* of the generalizability problem
130
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Daniel Lakens @lakens.bsky.social · 13/08/2026
My favorite Metascience conference will land in Copenhagen next year. The 9th (!) edition of the Perspectives on Science Error conference will be from January 27 to 29. Block your calendar, and see you there! errorsin.science
errorsin.science
Perspectives on Scientific Error 2027 · PSE9
Johanna Einsiedler, University of Copenhagen & University of Basel, johanna.einsiedler@sodas.ku.dk
12815
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Jamie Cummins @jamiecummins.bsky.social · 14/07/2026
Today we launch the first stable release of RegCheck: v1.0.0. RegCheck makes it easier and quicker to compare study registrations to published papers for consistency - something we know is important in principle, but rarely done in practice. A 🧵 on what's new: regcheck.app
regcheck.app
RegCheck
RegCheck is an AI tool to compare preregistrations with papers instantly.
512883
Reposted by Lukas Jung
simine vazire @simine.com · 03/07/2026
Beth continues to kick ass. So glad this kind of permanent academic position exists in metascience, and so glad @bethclarke.bsky.social is paving the way. Hopefully there will be lots more departments adding metasciencey people like her in the years to come! A pretty smart move if you ask me.
1357
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 29/06/2026
I have managed to abstract the template for replies to critiques.
A reply to critique

In this reply to the recent critique of our article, we: mischaracterize the critique; mischaracterize our own original claims; respond only to the peripheral arguments while remaining silent about the critique’s most devastating points; claim that the issues raised do not affect our core conclusions, regardless of whether this is the case or not; radically change the implied generality of our original claims; commit ad hominem while accusing others of it; and leverage the fact that we are likely to have the last word to generally muddy the waters.
49825
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Malte Elson @malte.the100.ci · 21/06/2026
Our lab loved this paper when it came out as it combined two of our interests, technology effects and schmeasurement. Plus: Registered report, open data. We read it for our journal club and found issues in the Slovak sample that we now posted to PubPeer: pubpeer.com/publications...
pubpeer.com
PubPeer - Confusion in gaming disorder measurement
There are comments on PubPeer for publication: Confusion in gaming disorder measurement (2026)
12115
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Sajedeh Rasti @sajedehra.bsky.social · 17/06/2026
What happens when researchers coordinate instead of compete? Our recent Nature World View article reflects on the experience of the Netherlands Metascience Coalition and what it might mean for the way we organize research. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Don’t compete, collaborate: why collective funding applications are the future
Scientists with disparate expertise writing grants together can identify knowledge gaps and drive progress — but systems must change to incentivize them.
21510
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Sam Westwood @samwestwood.bsky.social · 10/06/2026
Can you identify problems in a paper using only the reported statistics? @lhdjung.bsky.social joins us to discuss tools for assessing the trustworthiness of published research through summary statistics. Register free; open to all www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-kings-...
254
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 07/06/2026
Pure rage bait (laudatory) by @posit.co opensource.posit.co/blog/2026-05...
opensource.posit.co
In Defense of YAML
A common refrain among developers: YAML is bad and TOML is good. This post argues otherwise, tracing the history of configuration formats, examining what YAML 1.2 actually fixed, and introducing py-ya...
110
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 05/06/2026
If you have access to any the following stats software, would you be willing to run some chi squared tests on a handful of simulated datasets and send me results? I need to verify that that my R implementation of what other software does is correct. - Stata - SAS - StatXact - SPSS DM me :)
3310
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Anne Scheel @annemscheel.bsky.social · 25/05/2026
What riles me up about “people tried to shut down PP research” is that Cuddy’s own coauthor-turned-critic Carney guest-edited a whole special issue of Registered Reports on Power Posing (incl a meta-analysis), which shows strong evidence against PP even though most authors clearly weren’t sceptics.
25712
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 18/04/2026
I’m hiring a PhD student! The candidate will work alongside @zefreeman.bsky.social, who is joining our research group as postdoc. jobs.unibe.ch/job-vacancie...
jobs.unibe.ch
PhD Student in Meta-Science and Clinical Psychology - Universität Bern
Universität Bern is looking for PhD Student in Meta-Science and Clinical Psychology
47358
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Platform for Young Meta-Scientists (PYMS) @youngmetascience.bsky.social · 17/04/2026
Don't forget to sign up to attend one or multiple online ECR presentations next week! Ten ECR's will present their work in five lunch sessions Monday to Friday They would love your support and feedback! Full program: tinyurl.com/22v38up2 Sign up: forms.office.com/e/MkjYWqTvAw
074
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Jack Wilkinson @jdwilko.bsky.social · 09/04/2026
Very nice INSPECT-SR website containing the guidance and editable template, made by @ianhussey.mmmdata.io inspect.sr
inspect.sr
INSPECT-SR Guidance
INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews
1168
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Raphael Merz @raphaelmerz.bsky.social · 30/03/2026
PYMS is organizing online lunch talks from 20th–24th April! 🥪📖 If you‘re an ECR and want to discuss your meta-scientific research (or ideas for it), sign up now! 🚀
073
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Olmo van den Akker @denolmo.bsky.social · 25/03/2026
Should we use error checking tools like Statcheck and GRIM to automatically check for errors in studies in meta-analyses? I wrote a blog post with some insights from a hackathon where we scrutinized this idea. metaresearch.nl/blog/2026/3/...
metaresearch.nl
Checking for Statistical Errors in Primary Studies: A Way to Improve Meta-Analytic Evidence? — Meta-Research Center
This blogpost was written by dr. Olmo van den Akker. He is a postdoc in our department working on two projects: a systematic review of studies that simulate p-hacking, and a randomized controlled tria...
0208
Reposted by Lukas Jung
ERROR @error.reviews · 19/03/2026
New report: Joel, Eastwick, & Finkel (2017) “Is Romantic Desire Predictable? Machine Learning Applied to Initial Romantic Attraction”. Based on the review by @florianpargent.bsky.social, we find Minor Errors that do not affect the core conclusions of the manuscript. osf.io/hxnum
osf.io
OSF
1198
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 18/03/2026
I have a data integrity joke, but actually I don't
090
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Mwavu Kennedy @mwavu.com · 06/03/2026
python vs R? base R vs tidyverse? framework X vs Y? unless you're getting paid, use the one that brings you the most joy. life's too short to keep on writing code that you neither enjoy nor get paid for. #rstats
1448
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 03/03/2026
New preprint! 🎉 How much post-publication correction takes place in privacy and security research? Short answer: not so much. With Nele Borgert, Luisa Jansen, Theresa Halbritter (none on Bluesky), and @malte.the100.ci
051
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 01/03/2026
I should think twice before having Claude comment on my drafts
010
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 28/02/2026
The pipe wars, of course, are distinguished by the fact that one side is correct. #rstats
2121
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 26/02/2026
My favorites from what I got: - “Nested ifelse() builds character” - "attach() gets a bad rap" - "setwd() isn't that bad" - "Excel is underrated"
391
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 24/02/2026
Lagging behind as an #rstats developer since I haven't implemented my own pipe operator
0161
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 22/02/2026
Now that the #rstats pipe wars have flared up again, it's useful to remember what the pipe (base or magrittr) was designed for, and what it was never meant to do. 🧵 1 / 7
1248
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 21/02/2026
Legitimately going insane over tibble discourse
370
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 19/02/2026
So I took up badminton again, and I regret to inform you it's actually a sport. Now feeling muscles I didn't even know I had.
050
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Randy Ellis @randalljellis.bsky.social · 08/02/2026
Here's my conversation with Mu Yang on Metascience Matters: www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2EK... We discussed her work as a scientific sleuth, academic incentives for positive data, individual cases she has pursued, and why she loves being a sleuth. Also on Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/16R6...
youtube.com
300+ retractions, image manipulation, and why science should be boring | Metascience Matters #3
YouTube video by Metascience Matters
0145
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 06/02/2026
The tidyverse just got even nicer to use!
081
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 02/02/2026
"you could - by careful choice of an existing scoring method from the literature - find any effect, or nothing, or the reverse of any effect you choose. This is bonkers. ... so extreme as to be farcical." This is the sentiment we were hoping people would come away with! w/@anniria.bsky.social
13115
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 25/01/2026
The Iowa Gambling Task is an extreme example of Jingle Fallacy and schmeasurement. In 100 articles we found 244 different ways of scoring it, 177 were never reused. Correlations between them range -.99 to .99. At the same time, we show meta-analyses combine these results as if they’re equivalent.
417567
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Annika Külpmann @anniria.bsky.social · 25/01/2026
How many versions of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) exist? And how much does this affect research using the IGT? More than you might think. 🧵
310346
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 22/01/2026
Services like RegCheck are extremely promising for moving norms forward from doing open science practices to doing open science practices well.
13612
Reposted by Lukas Jung
ERROR @error.reviews · 22/01/2026
Improving scientific practice can seem daunting. In this fantastic talk (and thread below), Julia Rohrer shares practical ways to communicate methodological insights to a wider audience of researchers.
12310
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 12/01/2026
So here is one about the GRIM test, or granularity-related inconsistency of means: e.g., 20 integer data points can't have a mean of 4.39, but 100 data points can. In other words, the Ns justify the means.
091
Reposted by Lukas Jung
ERROR @error.reviews · 18/12/2025
At ERROR, we cannot compete with million-dollar bounties for whistleblowers. But it is great to see sleuthing work rewarded, and institutions admitting when their researchers engaged in misconduct.
0137
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 11/11/2025
This slide unfortunately generalizes well 🥲
Slide titled: The non-experimental psych workaround
- introduction: relies on a causal reading of the literature
- methods & results: implicitly (but never explicitly) causal inference-y
- discussion: only makes sense in terms of causality
- IMPORTANT: add a paragraph that your study was only observational and no causal conclusions are warranted. future longitudinal or experimental studies will surely fix this problem.
26212
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 13/12/2025
I'm sure everyone has seen this by now, but it is really fantastic.
030
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Jamie Cummins @jamiecummins.bsky.social · 09/12/2025
Just published in Behavior Research Methods: The individual-level precision of implicit measures w/ @ianhussey.mmmdata.io 🧵👇 link.springer.com/article/10.3...
link.springer.com
The individual-level precision of implicit measures - Behavior Research Methods
Implicit measures are used extensively in psychological science. One fundamental goal of these measures is to provide information diagnostic of an individual’s attitudes or beliefs. After 25 years of ...
15122
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 03/12/2025
Very nice to see this @retractionwatch.com story from today refer to our student newspaper interview with Eysenck's long-term collaborator Ronald Grossarth-Maticek from 2020: www.ruprecht.de/2020/01/28/t...
ruprecht.de
The Legacy of a Scandal
Science relies on controversy. Disagreement is part of research, solid consensus is overturned, celebrated researchers enter shady territory. Most of
092
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 03/12/2025
1. Transparency is necessary for credibility 2. Transparency is hard to change 3. Require transparency* 4. Transparency is not magic 5. Journals are part of problem 6. Expect more from journals 7. Peer review is not magic 8. A crisis can look a lot like „normal“ science 9. Meta-analysis is not magic
49039
Reposted by Lukas Jung
ERROR @error.reviews · 02/12/2025
Many error remain to be found in clinical trials. Patients deserve reliable results. Kudos to these authors for their persistent work to correct the record.
0135
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 12/10/2025
Breaking: OSF finally got a proper download button. @jamiecummins.bsky.social your prayers have been heard!
Screenshot of an OSF preprint page, now with a "Download preprint" button: https://osf.io/preprints/osf/zhm54_v1
1161
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 08/09/2025
Glad to see INSPECT-SR is out. A milestone in forensic metascience in medicine.
030
Lukas Jung @lhdjung.bsky.social · 19/08/2025
"Replicators could not be expected to guess what needs to be done in order to test and demonstrate a phenomenon [...]. Our view is that in science everything should be clearly specified and should not involve unspecified procedures and assumptions, or require implicit knowledge."
081
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 05/07/2025
“The extremity of this implicit rule needs to be recognized: academia, the industry whose main purpose is truth discovery, is surprisingly uncomfortable with people pointing out things that are not true.”
3618
Reposted by Lukas Jung
Daniel Lakens @lakens.bsky.social · 12/06/2025
Isn't it weird that different governments can take the exact same scientific knowledge about the state of science, and respond in completely opposite ways? This is what I see in The Netherlands vs the USA. Almost as if the problem is not the knowledge, but the government 🤷
0233