Sign in

Patrik Michaelsen

@michaelsen.bsky.social
1.4K followers 2.2K following 12 posts

Post doc in political science University of Gothenburg. Behavioral public policy, conservation policy, transparency, behavior change, open science www.patrikmichaelsen.com

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 24/08/2026
Six editors and nearly 60 advisory editors of Games and Economic Behavior resigned after Elsevier, the journal’s publisher, decided not to renew the editor-in-chief’s contract.
retractionwatch.com
Editors of economics journal resign after Elsevier doesn’t renew EIC’s contract
Six editors and nearly 60 advisory editors of Games and Economic Behavior resigned after the journal’s publisher decided not to renew the editor-in-chief’s contract.  In late July, Elsevier to…
03818
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Data Colada @datacolada.bsky.social · 31/08/2026
An influential paper by Ariely & Wertenbroch (2002) reported two studies with tampered data. Post 1 of 2. datacolada.org/138
datacolada.org
[138] Artificial Deadlines (Part 1): Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Study About Procrastination
A new paper in Psychological Science (.htm) reports a failure to replicate Study 2 of Ariely and Wertenbroch’s influential article entitled, “Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Contr…
723799
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Graham Kendall @grahamkendall.bsky.social · 08/07/2026
Looking at SJS (SCopus Journal Services), which offers publication services. The publication head is Dr. Fiona Wilson. We did a revrse image search on her photograph and this is what was returned (2nd image). 🧵
111
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Michael Okun @michael-okun.bsky.social · 10/06/2026
I’ve officially resigned as Associate Editor for Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience. It used to be a reputable journal, but became a case study in how forced automation destroys academic integrity. 👇
5435861430
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Dan Quintana @dsquintana.bsky.social · 29/04/2026
Selecting an effect size for power analysis is hard. Many researchers fall back on Cohen's thresholds, but they have no empirical basis and vary wildly by field. Our new paper offers a better option: field-specific effect size distributions built from meta-analytic data doi.org/10.3758/s134...
Abstract
Effect sizes are useful for understanding the magnitude of study results and for planning new studies via power analysis.
However, despite their wide usage, effect sizes are often misinterpreted. This is mostly due to an over-reliance on general
effect size benchmarks that were not intended for broad application across diverse research fields. Inaccurate effect size
interpretations can lead to incorrect conclusions about the magnitude of study results and incorrect sample size estimates,
thereby increasing the likelihood of false-positive results. This article introduces the ESDist R package, which is designed
to calculate empirically derived effect-size benchmarks or a range of reliably detectable empirical effect sizes for a specific
research question or field of interest by computing effect size distributions (ESDs). This package can be used on data that
can be easily extracted from pre-existing meta-analyses to help researchers more accurately plan new studies or to better
understand how an individual study might relate to other studies in their field. ESDist includes a set of features that make it
easy to use in a priori power analysis. Moreover, the package includes a feature for estimating effect size benchmarks that
account for publication bias and are weighted by effect sizes' variances, which addresses existing limitations of using ESDs
for study planning or interpretation.
316175
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 01/04/2026
SCORE, a collaboration of 865 researchers, is now released as three papers in Nature, six preprints, and a lot of data (cos.io/score/). SCORE examined repeatability of findings from the social-behavioral sciences and tested whether human and automated methods could predict replicability.
cos.io
SCORE | Center for Open Science
SCORE shows that there is no shortcut to producing credible research findings, and there is no single indicator of trustworthiness. Research progress depends on transparency, rigor, and establishing r...
1190107
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 21/03/2026
Psychology has a whole cottage industry in which people come up with some construct that is essentially "attitudes/beliefs/expectations/feelings about X", and then the central claim is that this construct is a super important determinant of future X outcomes.>
1416837
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 03/03/2026
Hannah Ritchie has built a fun little tool where you can compare energy usage of various products and activities. This is super helpful imho, because it's so hard to develop intuitions even just about the scales involved here. hannahritchie.substack.com/p/does-that-...
Screenshot of the "Does that use a lot of energy?" online app
315465
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Marcus Crede @marcuscrede.bsky.social · 01/03/2026
Today the APA journal that published that meta-analysis rejected our commentary - primarily because our findings were not interesting enough. What the actual fuck!
3191
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Marcus Crede @marcuscrede.bsky.social · 01/03/2026
We recently submitted a commentary on a very influential meta-analysis. We found that: 1) 40% of relevant literature had not been identified because of lazy search, 2) a few large N included studies did not meet stated inclusion criteria, and 3) that almost all sig. moderator findings were wrong.
1248
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Per Engzell @pengzell.bsky.social · 19/02/2026
In 1975-1977, the Swedish Government carried out an official investigation into the future of electronic music. Where is this kind of leadership today I ask
06216
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Daniel Lakens @lakens.bsky.social · 17/02/2026
If you set out to test a hypothesis, you should preregister it. If you deviate from a preregistration, report a table with all deviations, and evaluate the consequences for the validity and severity of the test. As a reviewer, ask for such a table! online.ucpress.edu/collabra/art...
online.ucpress.edu
When and How to Deviate From a Preregistration
As the practice of preregistration becomes more common, researchers need guidance in how to report deviations from their preregistered statistical analysis plan. A principled approach to the use of…
0215
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Ryan Briggs @ryancbriggs.net · 11/02/2026
It's ironic to see a discipline care **so much** about unbiasedness (causal inference!) at the level of a single test but then have a research production system and culture that is basically a ferocious bias generation machine. This is not good.
315725
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Ryan Briggs @ryancbriggs.net · 11/02/2026
I have a new paper. We look at ~all stats articles in political science post-2010 & show that 94% have abstracts that claim to reject a null. Only 2% present only null results. This is hard to explain unless the research process has a filter that only lets rejections through.
It must be very hard to publish null results
Publication practices in the social sciences act as a filter that favors statistically significant results over null findings. While the problem of selection on significance (SoS) is well-known in theory, it has been difficult to measure its scope empirically, and it has been challenging to determine how selection varies across contexts. In this article, we use large language models to extract granular and validated data on about 100,000 articles published in over 150 political science journals from 2010 to 2024. We show that fewer than 2% of articles that rely on statistical methods report null-only findings in their abstracts, while over 90% of papers highlight significant results. To put these findings in perspective, we develop and calibrate a simple model of publication bias. Across a range of plausible assumptions, we find that statistically significant results are estimated to be one to two orders of magnitude more likely to enter the published record than null results. Leveraging metadata extracted from individual articles, we show that the pattern of strong SoS holds across subfields, journals, methods, and time periods. However, a few factors such as pre-registration and randomized experiments correlate with greater acceptance of null results. We conclude by discussing implications for the field and the potential of our new dataset for investigating other questions about political science.
29643220
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
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 Patrik Michaelsen
OneOcean Flotilla @oceanflotilla.bsky.social · 21/01/2026
Across 8 countries, large majorities back the #30x30 goal. Support grows when all nations share protection duties, richer nations pay more, more countries join in and “buying protection abroad” is barred. At home, people prefer nature-first siting and polluter-pays funding. bit.ly/4jALfRy
bit.ly
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...
042
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Mark Fabian @markfabian.bsky.social · 19/01/2026
After a provocation from Todd Kashdan I wrote up some frustrations I have with "wellbeing science", specifically the idea that it was born with life satisfaction scales. I think this belief is untrue and unhelpful. profmarkfabian.substack.com/p/airing-my-...
profmarkfabian.substack.com
Airing my grievances with wellbeing science
We have a streetlight problem
4309
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 13/01/2026
We have reached a situation where (1) the time/resources spent by people applying for grant X often outweighs (2) the time/resources awarded. For these grants, society loses net time/resources. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
Client Challenge
15310
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Jonathan Birch @birchlse.bsky.social · 08/01/2026
Martin Peterson's creative response to being banned from teaching Plato (shared with his permission).
An email from Martin Peterson to university administrators.
6150991520
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 25/11/2025
Related: ”The Chrysalis Effect: How Ugly Initial Results Metamorphosize Into Beautiful Articles” doi.org/10.1177/0149...
010
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 10/11/2025
Environmental social science post doc position in Gothenburg with highly recommended colleagues
020
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Environmental Information: Use and Influence (Dalhousie Univ.) @eiui.bsky.social · 05/09/2025
Achieving the global 30by30 #biodiversity conservation targets requires political compromises & navigating conflicts. @michaelsen.bsky.social et al. found strong public support for the targets in 8 countries, which suggests expansion of protected areas is politically feasible doi.org/10.1073/pnas...
Title, authors’ names, abstract, and keywords from a paper about public support for the global 30-by-30 biodiversity conservation targets based on a survey in eight countries
031
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
Possibly of interest to: @worldwildlife.org @greenpeace.org @greenpeace.eu @aspca.org @theclimatereality.bsky.social @oxconservationsoc.bsky.social @climatecentral.org @wclnews.bsky.social @lgspace.bsky.social @naturebasedsols.bsky.social @sierraclub.org
010
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
Possibly of interest to @ipbes.net @unep.org @unbiodiversity.bsky.social @thegef.bsky.social @society4conbio.bsky.social @scbeurope.bsky.social @biodivoxford.bsky.social @nature.org @science.nature.org @globallf.bsky.social @conservationorg.bsky.social @protectparks.bsky.social @wcs.org
010
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
A second experiment on domestic-level policy regimes shows similar, but somewhat more diverse, results across countries. Results include a widespread preferences of protected areas that prioritize nature values (even over social or economic), and general dislike of funding PAs through general taxes
A visual representation of a discrete choice experiment with results separated by country
000
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
Experimentally, we find highly consistent policy preferences for international-level expansion regimes. Results include widespread preferences for rich countries bearing higher costs, and generally that each country should protect 30% (instead of e.g., according to conservation benefits)
A visual representation of a discrete choice experiment with results separated by country
100
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
We find 30x30 support levels in the range of 80-90% for Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Spain samples. Swedish (66% in favor) and USA (71%) respondents show strong majority support, albeit at comparatively lower levels.
Nine histograms displaying support levels from individual countries
100
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 01/09/2025
New: Strong global support for the 30x30 conservation target *Data from 5 continents (N=12k) show 82% in support of 30x30 *2 experiments find highly consistent expansion policy preferences, incl. prioritization of nature and rich countries bearing higher costs Out now OA in @pnas.org. Viz. below.
pnas.org
Mass support for conserving 30% of the Earth by 2030: Experimental evidence from five continents | PNAS
Rapid global expansion of protected areas is critical for safeguarding biodiversity but depends on political action for successful implementation. ...
44723
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 03/06/2025
My own branch has replicated several times
030
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 03/06/2025
^this is true
010
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 03/06/2025
Hey! If social psychology could read they’d be very upset
2130
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Paul Bogdan @pbogdan.bsky.social · 09/04/2025
🚨New paper!🚨 Meta-analysis on 4M p-values across 240k psych articles: How has psychology changed since the replication crisis began? How is replicability linked to citations, impact factor, and university prestige? 🧵 Paper: journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/... Interactive: pbogdan.com/meganal
Figure 1 of the paper
27937
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Laura K Gee @laurakgee.bsky.social · 27/05/2025
Haven't read this yet, but this seems very important for #ExpEcon folks. 22–27% failed comprehension in the DG & UG; in the Trust Game and Public Goods Game, that number hit 70% and 52%. doi.org/10.1016/j.je... (Note saw posted on other site but author doesn't seem to be here, so making a new post)
2165
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 01/05/2025
🚨 New paper out in @pnas.org 🚨 Together with Armin Granulo and Christoph Fuchs, we explore how people respond to system-level policies—like bans or mandates— 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 vs. 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 they are implemented. Paper 🔗 doi.org/10.1073/pnas... Preprint 🔗 osf.io/preprints/ps... Open materials 🔗 osf.io/6qajn/
1257
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Journal of Public Policy @jpublicpolicy.bsky.social · 23/03/2025
A new blog post by Lauren Yehle, @michaelsen.bsky.social, Niklas Harring, and Sverker C. Jagers - t.ly/cw_CR ! The article “Conservation for nature and wildlife’s sake: the effects of (non-)anthropocentric ethical justifications on policy acceptability” is available here: t.ly/HWHfQ
t.ly
Conservation for Nature and Wildlife’s Sake: The Effects of (Non-)Anthropocentric Ethical Justifications on Policy Acceptability « Political Science and International Relations# « Cambridge Core Blog
Human activities continue to degrade nature and encroach on wildlife’s habitats and undeveloped open areas. Concern for the environment appears to be increasing as indicated by numerous countries sign...
031
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
John Holbein @johnholbein1.bsky.social · 10/02/2025
I knew publication bias in political science was bad; I didn't know it was this bad. "98.8% of abstracts report non-null results compared to only 16.9% reporting null findings." This is bad.
15012
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Journal of Public Policy @jpublicpolicy.bsky.social · 07/01/2025
A new interesting article by Lauren Yehle, @michaelsen.bsky.social, Niklas Harring, and Sverker C. Jagers is now available. It is entitled “Conservation for nature and wildlife’s sake: the effects of (non-)anthropocentric ethical justifications on policy acceptability”. Enjoy it here: t.ly/HWHfQ
021
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Stephanie M. Lee @stephaniemlee.bsky.social · 19/11/2024
the fallout from the Francesca Gino research misconduct scandal isn't over. @engber.bsky.social writes about how an effort by some of her colleagues to self-audit their work with her ended up raising even more questions — for them personally and their whole field www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...
theatlantic.com
The Business-School Scandal That Just Keeps Getting Bigger
The rot runs deeper than almost anyone has guessed.
15292113
Reposted by Patrik Michaelsen
Behavioural Public Policy @bppjournal.bsky.social · 15/11/2024
Abstracts deadline for the 4th annual International Behavioural Public Policy Conference is January 31st, 2025. Next year's conference will be in the UK, 10-12 September Full details on abstract submission: www.ibppa.org/conference-s...
ibppa.org
IBPPC 2025 - Submissions | IBPPA
032
Patrik Michaelsen @michaelsen.bsky.social · 11/11/2024
Thanks for organizing, would love to be added!
100