Sign in

Michael Vincent

@michaelvincent.bsky.social
78 followers 115 following 15 posts
PostsRepliesMedia
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
The new editorial board is taking the journal in some peculiar new directions, by the looks!
010
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 09/04/2026
I only encountered this recently too. As far as I can tell, the explanation is that equating 'take something seriously' with 'take it literally' is actually a peculiarly modern (WEIRD?) phenomenon. Would love to understand it better.
000
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 16/03/2026
Ah, that makes sense, thanks heaps.
001
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 16/03/2026
Is it strange to see such a strong trend in undecided voters? I'd have assumed that's a pretty heterogeneous set of people.
100
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 11/02/2026
New academic title just dropped
Typo on a university directory calls someone 'Brofessor'
010
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 26/12/2025
Since we renounced p-hacking, it's nitpick-or-perish for us
120
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 15/11/2025
There is a fair bit of distance between public reason and public discourse in Rawls. Habermas (also neo-Kantian) links the two much more closely, he might do more to address your concern.
010
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 15/11/2025
Awesome, I love these!
010
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 31/07/2025
And the appropriation of the ideal of 'objectivity'!
020
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 31/07/2025
Yes! Hard to tear my eyes away from the news from the States. Horrible to see the language of 'gold standard science' appropriated like this. It could be a whole other chapter again on policing misconduct 🤔
110
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 31/07/2025
Something for us to keep discussing @markhooper.bsky.social ? I've heard of attempts to 'prove' that methodological objections are used to avoid publishing politically sensitive work, but a bit of googling just now didn't produce anything, so maybe my informant hallucinated it...
120
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 30/07/2025
I think competition for 'turf' between research psychology, clinical psychotherapy, and emerging research/clinical neuroscience (all extremely different perspectives) might produce some good examples in the near future?
110
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 30/07/2025
Haha, yes! Fascinating idea, and consistent with the nod to Kuhn in our paper. 'Physics envy' comes to mind. And being asked by my psych colleagues 'where's your data?'
110
Reposted by Michael Vincent
Mark Rubin @markrubin.bsky.social · 29/07/2025
“Nothing we say here is against the use of proxies, which are useful, necessary, and unavoidable. The risks occur when we blindly pursue the proxy itself, use the wrong proxies, or mistake the proxy for the thing itself.” Michael Vincent‪ & @markhooper.bsky.social’s new work on research integrity.
doi.org
Research integrity, thick and thin - Synthese
We contrast two value-schemas of research integrity. One is the ‘thick’ ethos of an immersed and ethical researcher. The other is the ‘thin’ rules, responsibilities, and metrics that we use to communi...
1225
Reposted by Michael Vincent
Mark Hooper @markhooper.bsky.social · 30/07/2025
We discuss cultural change initiatives to promote #researchintegrity. We distinguish 2 schemas of research integrity: 👉The thick, lived kind 👉The thin, rule-based kind. We need both. What’s interesting is trying to understand how they relate. Had fun writing this! link.springer.com/article/10.1...
link.springer.com
Research integrity, thick and thin - Synthese
We contrast two value-schemas of research integrity. One is the ‘thick’ ethos of an immersed and ethical researcher. The other is the ‘thin’ rules, responsibilities, and metrics that we use to communi...
0143
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 30/07/2025
Thank you for engaging with us @markrubin.bsky.social , I'm glad you found the paper interesting!
110
Michael Vincent @michaelvincent.bsky.social · 23/03/2025
Has anybody here read the book? I've met Stephen Macedo, he seems like a pretty decent guy, I'd take what he has to say seriously.
100