Sign in

Stefan Pfattheicher

@stepf.bsky.social
333 followers 322 following 49 posts

Here to share The Transparent and Open Science Game: osf.io/t9ngd boredom | empathy | pro- and antisocial behavior and traits | pasta | Aarhus University

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Thomas Talhelm @thomastalhelm.bsky.social · 16/09/2026
🚨 It's published! 🚨 This is the big one. 100 cultures, 12,000 people, 108 researchers. Why people (and our most-used surveys) get collectivism wrong and how to fix it. www.nature.com/articles/s41... @natureportfolio.nature.com
312461
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Sergio Pirla @sergiopirla.bsky.social · 26/08/2026
New paper out in SBE! Self-employment is linked to lower boredom, a relationship that is not captured by traditional measures of well-being. A less boring life may be an overlooked (an independent) component of the well-being gains from self-employment! link.springer.com/article/10.1...
link.springer.com
Boredom and psychological well-being among the self-employed - Small Business Economics
Individuals not only seek a happy and meaningful life, but an interesting rather than a boring one. In this paper, we analyze data from 19,000 individuals across 25 European countries to demonstrate t...
022
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
David Roberts @volts.wtf · 23/08/2026
I hope everyone caught this Lancet study confirming that Elon Musk & DOGE are responsible for genocidal levels of suffering & death.
thelancet.com
Evaluating the impact of two decades of USAID interventions and projecting the effects of defunding on mortality up to 2030: a retrospective impact evaluation and forecasting analysis
USAID funding has significantly contributed to the reduction in adult and child mortality across low-income and middle-income countries over the past two decades. Our estimates show that, unless the a...
5435201809
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Michael Bang Petersen @m-b-petersen.bsky.social · 29/07/2026
Vaccination is collective action: Vaccination helps others by hindering disease-spread But there is an incentive free-ride: if enough others vaccinate, you don't need to pay those costs In a new paper, we provide new evidence with data from 6+ mil covid-vaccinations: osf.io/preprints/ps... 🧵1/7
Abstract
Classical theories in health psychology explain individuals’ decisions about whether or not to
engage in protective behavior such as vaccination during a health emergency as guided by
trade-offs about personal risks and benefits. Yet, vaccinations involve a clear collective action
component, where individuals can protect others by getting vaccinated, beyond the personal
benefits. Following recent research, we develop the argument that individual differences in the
motivation to engage in collective action should influence vaccination decisions during the most
significant health emergency in the 21st century, the COVID-19 pandemic, above and beyond the
predictors proposed by classical theories. We test this argument by combining survey observations
from 380,516 unique Danish adults with population-wide registry data on COVID-19 vaccination
status for 6.1 million individuals in Denmark, of whom 4.9 million received at least one vaccine
dose. Using this unique data infrastructure, we compare classical psychological correlates of
protective behavior with psychological measures of individual-differences in collective action motivation.
The results demonstrate collective action motivation was more strongly associated with
vaccination behavior than threat appraisal or coping appraisal across the vaccination sequence,
spanning completion of the recommended primary vaccination course, booster receipt, time to
full vaccination, and vaccination uptake among the children of survey respondents. Furthermore,
high levels of collective action motivation strongly weakened the role of personal considerations
that would otherwise deter vaccination uptake, both in terms of whether or not the individual
gets vaccinated and how quickly the individual gets vaccinated. These findings provide important
information on the prerequisites of successful vaccination campaigns during major health crises
and how governments and authorities can facilitate them.
2307
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Cat Hicks @grimalkina.bsky.social · 23/06/2026
what on EAAAAAAARTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Narcissism. In the interest of maximizing data availability and minimizing social desirability and self-deception biases, we measured CEO narcissism unobtrusively (Chatterjee and Hambrick, 2007, Grijalva et al., 2020). Consistent with prior research on CEO narcissism (e.g., Cragun et al., 2020, Ham et al., 2017, Ham et al., 2018, O’Reilly et al., 2014), we collected four unobtrusive indicators of CEO narcissism and created a composite index: (1) the prominence of the CEO’s photograph in the company’s annual report; (2) the CEO’s signature size; (3) the CEO’s cash compensation divided by that of the second-highest paid executive in the firm; and (4) the CEO’s non-cash compensation divided by that of the second-highest-paid executive in the firm (Chatterjee and Hambrick, 2007, Ham et al., 2017). These formative indicators reflect CEOs’ tendencies to be portrayed as special and superior—both in centering their images and identities in company communications and in displaying entitlement to pay themselves more than others (e.g., Oesterle et al., 2016, Rijsenbilt and Commandeur, 2013). Of the 318 CEOs, 259 CEOs had available data for all four indicators. To ensure the most accurate representation of where each CEO fell in the population, we standardized each narcissism indicator using all available data.2 Our results were consistent in magnitude and direction when we standardized the data after removing CEOs with missing data from the sample.
167916
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Brendan Barrett @bjjbarrett.bsky.social · 23/06/2026
excited about this one: using longitudinal movement data and dyadic models, we show that orangutan moms adjust their ranging patterns so their kids can play with age-mates independent of kinship, at personal costs. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
Mothers with similarly aged offspring share more space, and their offspring play more.
Posterior effect sizes from social relations models (SRMs) of (a, b) infant-infant play scans (n = 996
infant-dyad-years across 79 mother dyads) and (c) mother-mother home-range overlap (Bhattacharyya coefficient; n
= 282 mother-dyad years across 71 mother dyads). Panel (a) shows the hurdle component (probability of play
occurrence), sign-flipped so positive values indicate higher probability of play occurrence; panel (b) shows the count
component (play frequency). Points and thick and thin lines show posterior medians with 66% and 89% credible
intervals, respectively. (d) Counterfactual home-range overlap for each dyad when offspring are the same age versus
6 years apart. Points show posterior medians across all mother-mother dyads (one horizontal bar per dyad);
background densities show population-level predictions. (e) Offspring age-difference effect on home-range overlap
versus intersection area. (f) Posterior difference between the two effects (BC overlap minus intersection area).
17629
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Rasha Kardosh @rasharasha.bsky.social · 04/06/2026
Out in PNAS pnas.org/doi/10.1073/... Inequality is not only hard to solve. Sometimes, it is hard to *see*. We ask a simple question: Do people notice when members of minority groups are absent? Across field studies and experiments, the answer was often no.
pnas.org
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...
27033
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Nicholas A. Coles, PhD @nicholascoles.bsky.social · 12/05/2026
Can gratitude interventions make the world happier? We tested 6 gratitude practices across 34 countries with 10,696 participants to find out — and the answer is more interesting than a simple yes 🧵 www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
pnas.org
A multinational megastudy of the effects of gratitude practices on subjective well-being | PNAS
Scholars have observed people from a variety of cultures using a variety of gratitude-related practices to change their emotions, outlooks, and soc...
22418
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Robert Böhm @robertboehm.bsky.social · 23/04/2026
🚨NEW PREPRINT🚨 together with Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler: “Massaging Significance in the Age of Open Science: A Satirical Tutorial,” which is a public service for anyone unwilling to let inconvenient data get in the way of a compelling narrative. 😉 Link to preprint: osf.io/preprints/ps...
22311
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Malte Elson @malte.the100.ci · 24/04/2026
This is why we (@jamiecummins.bsky.social @bethclarke.bsky.social and I) have developed RegCheck, a tool that automatically checks for potential deviations. regcheck.app
regcheck.app
RegCheck
RegCheck is an AI tool to compare preregistrations with papers instantly.
02911
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Oded Rechavi @odedrechavi.bsky.social · 03/04/2026
Every PI
731048
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 01/04/2026
Majestic, well done @rickcarlsson.bsky.social
The alt text for this image is available upon reasonable request.
26827
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Eiko Fried @eikofried.bsky.social · 19/03/2026
3 new studies on using psychedelics as treatments for mental disorders just came out; 2 in JAMA Psychiatry, 1 in Lancet Psychiatry. I reviewed one of these submissions. Here are the core results. 🧵
24215
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Jenny Saffran @jennysaffran.bsky.social · 18/03/2026
The fee to publish an open access paper at Trends in Cognitive Science is now over $7,000. Seriously, @elsevierconnect.bsky.social ??? For a 4,000 word piece? Talk about a broken system.
34214
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Marc Malmdorf Andersen @ndersen.bsky.social · 10/03/2026
Denmark is often portrayed as a fairly equal society, but when looking at the distribution of wealth a different picture emerges. The richest 1% of the population owns more wealth than the bottom 82% combined. Wealth tax is now being debated. #dkmedier #dkpol #dkvalg (oxfam.dk/publikatione...)
oxfam.dk
Ny analyse: Top 1 pct. har mere formue end 82 pct. af den danske befolkning
En ny opgørelse viser, at de rigeste cirka 48.000 mennesker i Danmark har lige så meget formue som 3,9 millioner danskere tilsammen.
064
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Joe Noonan @joenoonan.se · 13/03/2026
Coming up with a post-hoc theory section when your results are weird:
51786270
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
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 Stefan Pfattheicher
Christopher Barrie @cbarrie.bsky.social · 25/02/2026
🧵on my new paper "Synthetic personas distort the structure of human belief systems" w Roberto Cerina I'm v excited about... 🚨 Do synthetic samples look like human samples? We compare 28 LLMs to the 2024 General Social Survey (GSS) to find out + develop host of diagnostics...
618282
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Peter Tennant @pwgtennant.bsky.social · 25/02/2026
This recent RCT of an "AI stethoscope" claims the technology "shows promise" for diagnosing cardiovascular conditions. It does not. It is a textbook example of the risks of conducting unprincipled 'per protocol analyses'. Once again, peer review at a major medical journal has failed. 🧵 1/
8436186
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Daniel Lakens @lakens.bsky.social · 23/02/2026
198 effect sizes in ego depletion resesrch showed an effect size of d=0.62. Preregistered large replications (including some by original authors) yielded an effect size of 0. No one has been able to offer any other explanation for this huge research waste than massive p-hacking.
613446
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Dave Wenning @rxdavid.bsky.social · 21/02/2026
This too…
242728543
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Malte Elson @malte.the100.ci · 14/02/2026
Just an aside: 41 of the 100 meta analyses published in Psych Bull between 2023 and 2025 do not include *any* quality screening of identified studies. To the degree that those literatures include bad studies, they are being laundered together with the good ones.
4296
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 22/01/2026
Positive and negative self-esteem are two (or one?) such offenders that I cover in my blog post. www.the100.ci/2023/06/13/d...
the100.ci
Disentangling the Dark and Bright Side of Constructs with a Bright and Dark Side
This blog post resulted from a draft that was supposed to become a proper article at some point. Michael Dufner and Tailcalled both worked on the draft and contributed important ideas. But, as so ofte...
5166
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
John Holbein @johnholbein1.bsky.social · 25/12/2025
Researchers recently asked Americans what income level other people need in order to live a good life. A whopping 86% of Americans reported income levels well below what others say they themselves need. Fascinating!
28023
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Ruben C. Arslan @ruben.the100.ci · 18/12/2025
Finally, @bjoernhommel.bsky.social's and my paper introducing the SurveyBot3000 is officially out in AMPPS. It's a fine-tuned language model that guesstimates correlations between survey items from text alone. Not perfectly, but useful for search, for example. journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Fig. 3. Scatter plots of the synthetic and empirical estimates, validation study (Stage 2). Showing N = 30,135 item-pair correlations, N = 257 scale reliabilities, and N = 1,568 scale-pair correlations for (top) the pretrained SBERT model and (bottom) the fine-tuned SurveyBot3000 model. SBERT = all-mpnet-base-v2 model.Fig. 4. Prediction error of the synthetic estimates, validation study (Stage 2). Our prediction model allowed the error term to vary freely according to the predictor, the synthetic estimate. The thin-plate splines show that some synthetic estimates were predictably more accurate.
Fig. 5. Accuracy by domain. Accuracy differed across domains. SurveyBot3000 accuracy (colored) was always higher than SBERT accuracy (gray). Results were largely consistent whether accuracy of items was tested (left, circle) within domains or (right, cross) across domains.Fig. 1. Multistep training procedure for the SurveyBot3000, which produces synthetic estimates of interitem correlations. (a) Pretraining base model (SBERT). (b) Fine-tuning SurveyBot3000. (c) Validation. SBERT = all-mpnet-base-v2 model.
28134
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Sander van der Linden @profsanderlinden.bsky.social · 11/12/2025
New paper out in @science.org! We unveil the online manipulation market with the Cambridge Online Trust & Safety Index (COTSI). We show in real time the cost of purchasing fake accounts across every social platform around the world - so they can be held accountable www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...
science.org
Mapping the online manipulation economy
A market perspective on digital manipulation may help improve online trust and safety
412363
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 09/12/2025
Achal Agrawal is on Nature’s list of 10 people who shaped science in 2025. His work helped change India’s university rankings system to include a penalty for large number of retractions. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
This science sleuth revealed a retraction crisis at Indian universities
Achal Agrawal is part of Nature’s 10, a list of people who shaped science in 2025.
24114
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Christoph Schild @schildchristoph.bsky.social · 09/12/2025
🚨STOP, replication time!🚨 Does Feeling “Right” Make the Good More Good (and the Bad More Bad)? Achar & Lee found that when people experience regulatory fit, moral predispositions get amplified—moral folks act more moral, less moral folks act less moral. Big, exciting claim!
1125
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
jon ben-menachem @jbenmenachem.com · 08/12/2025
Our new study provides rare causal evidence about NYC’s speed camera program. We find large reductions in collisions (30%) and injuries (16%) near intersections with cameras. www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1... @astagoff.bsky.social ky.social @brendenbeck.bsky.social nbeck.bsky.social 🧪
pnas.org
Can speed cameras make streets safer? Quasi-experimental evidence from New York City | PNAS
Each year, approximately 40,000 people die in vehicle collisions in the United States, generating $340 billion in economic costs. To make roads saf...
10526178
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Karolina Ścigała @kascigala.bsky.social · 05/12/2025
Does “feeling right”—that is, experiencing regulatory fit—lead us to act more in line with our moral preferences? With @schildchristoph.bsky.social and @stepf.bsky.social, we conducted a series of the first large-scale, independent close replications in the field of regulatory fit.
196
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Snowden St. @snowden.st · 02/12/2025
Currently dorking out over this graph about child mortality with my brother. Just mind boggling to take in.
chart of child mortality in history, roughly 48% for all societies across the globe…until the 20th century, where it plummets to 4%
732505976
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Merriam-Webster @merriam-webster.com · 01/12/2025
"We will call the 12th month of the year 'December'... which means 'tenth month.'"
Screenshot of SNL's George Washington sketch from 10/28/23 with Nate Bargatze
271314238
Stefan Pfattheicher @stepf.bsky.social · 01/12/2025
Sharp analysis on why 'Why $100,000 Is the New Poor' www.yesigiveafig.com/p/part-1-my-...
000
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Björn E. Hommel @bjoernhommel.bsky.social · 26/11/2025
🚨 SynthNet is out 🚨 Researchers propose new constructs and measures faster than anyone can track. We (@anniria.bsky.social @ruben.the100.ci) built a search engine to check what already exists and help identify redundancies; indexing 74,000 scales from ~31,500 instruments in APA PsycTests. 🧵1/3
315886
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Kai Sassenberg @kaisassenberg.bsky.social · 26/11/2025
At ZPID we are searching for a tenure track assistant professor for Psychological Metascience in joint appointment with @unitrier.bsky.social preferably someone who has conducted quantitative research in metascience in psychology or related disciplines. Questions? Feel free to contact me personally.
01718
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Peter Luca Versteegen @versteegenluca.bsky.social · 18/11/2025
The only positive news about this paper is that this development may incentive social scientist to go out and talk to people again
0101
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Jennifer Tackett @jnfrltackett.bsky.social · 12/11/2025
Y'all. N>3,800. !!!!!!! Goodness gracious.
65826
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Josh Miller @jdmiller.bsky.social · 17/11/2025
In our rejoinder, we argue 1) Dark terminology isn't used responsibly as BL et al. claim, 2) the term can be replaced with a more sensible and scientific one, 3) data support our position (Stanton et al., 2025), and 4) popularity ≠ importance. @davidchester.bsky.social @drlynam.bsky.social
22913
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Christian T. Elbaek @celbaek.bsky.social · 15/11/2025
Proud to have signed letter from 600+ economists & inequality experts from 70 countries supporting the call for a new Independent Panel on Inequality- an Inequality IPCC- to tackle the inequality emergency- G20 leaders must support this. #G20SouthAfrica www.independent.co.uk/news/south-a...
independent.co.uk
Top economists call on world leaders to set up an international panel on inequality
Hundreds of top economists and other experts including former U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen are calling for the world to set up an independent international panel on income and wealth inequalit...
062
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 11/11/2025
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing: a 🧵 1/n Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820 Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/... Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below.

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.A figure detailing the drain on researcher time.

1. The four-fold drain

1.2 Time
The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce,
with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure
1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material
has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs,
grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for
profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time.
The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million
unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of
peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting
widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the
authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many
review demands.
Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of
scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in
‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow
progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to
volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier,
local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with
limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging
with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks
intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below:

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised
scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers
first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour
resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
8644453
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Casper Albers 🟥 @casperalbers.nl · 11/11/2025
Doing non-causal inference (and being explicit about it), yet using a causal word as second word in the title. If you pay Nature € 10.690, they will publish this in Nature Ageing. I can tell you what I think of that for free. www.nature.com/articles/s43...
screenshot from the paper, stating that no causal claims (like they did in the title) should be made.paper title
714440
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Ansgar Hudde @hudde.bsky.social · 03/11/2025
📊 now in English @fesonline.bsky.social: Gender gap in voting behavior in Germany📊 It's about the “big picture” since 1953 & current trends 2021-2025. The gender gap keeps growing, especially among the young. -> Longer trends are continuing & partly accelerating. library.fes.de/pdf-files/a-...
411848
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Dr Dan Shugar 🇨🇦 @watershedlab.bsky.social · 01/11/2025
Who did this?!
A joke scientific paper with the title "Over 90% of children diagnosed with autism consumed breast milk and/or formula mileL a comprehensive cross-sectional analysis of the obvious"
661192312
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Calvin Lai @calvinklai.bsky.social · 31/10/2025
We read the (in)famous Bem Feeling the Future JPSP paper for a "spooky" Halloween lab meeting and it was fabulous!! I couldn't get over the wild methodological issue where they type of psychic power he founded depended on what random number generator Bem used 😂
1201
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Laura Jacobs @lcjacobs89.bsky.social · 24/10/2025
Now out in Party Politics 🎉 Our study (@jbpilet.bsky.social)suggests that when a mainstream right-wing party signals willingness to rule with the radical right, support for the radical right rises — while the mainstream gains nothing. 👉 A legitimisation effect. journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
2236124
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 16/10/2025
Gambetta & Origgi on the LL Game, in which agents prefer to deliver and receive (!) low quality. This paper is absolutely savage but also feels uncomfortably relevant to parts of academia outside of Italy 👀 diegogambetta.org/wp-content/u...
Abstract
We investigate a phenomenon which we have experienced as common when dealing
with an assortment of Italian public and private institutions: people promise to exchange
high-quality goods and services, but then something goes wrong and the quality delivered
is lower than had been promised. While this is perceived as ‘cheating’ by outsiders,
insiders seem not only to adapt to, but to rely on this outcome. They do not resent
low-quality exchanges; in fact, they seem to resent high-quality ones, and are inclined
to put pressure on or avoid dealing with agents who deliver high quality. The equilibrium
among low-quality producers relies on an unusual preference ranking which differs from
that associated with the Prisoners’ Dilemma and similar games, whereby self-interested
rational agents prefer to dish out low quality in exchange for high quality. While equally
‘lazy’, agents in our low-quality worlds are oddly ‘pro-social’: for the advantage of
maximizing their raw self-interest, they prefer to receive low-quality goods and services,
provided that they too can in exchange deliver low quality without embarrassment. They
develop a set of oblique social norms to sustain their preferred equilibrium when threatened by the intrusion of high quality. We argue that high-quality collective outcomes are
endangered not only by self-interested individual defectors, but by ‘cartels’ of mutually
satisfied mediocrities.
512230
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Lukas Röseler @aufdroeseler.bsky.social · 10/10/2025
ReplicationResearch.org is now open for submissions! Submit replications and reproductions from many different fields, as well as conceptual contributions. With diamond OA, open and citable peer review reports, and reproducibility checks, we push the boundaries of open and fair publishing.
39354
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Tamkinat Rauf @tsrauf.bsky.social · 29/09/2025
Life satisfaction mostly declines with age. Previous findings (esp. the famous U-shaped age-SWB trajectory) were artifacts of misspecified models. doi.org/10.1093/esr/...
1016651
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Malte Elson @malte.the100.ci · 29/09/2025
Meta
2234
Reposted by Stefan Pfattheicher
Wanja Wolff @wanjawolff.bsky.social · 21/09/2025
What a cool format! 🎓 I had a great time as the opponent at Thekla Müller-Boysen’s PhD defense @au.dk. It was a strong defense and made for a fun discussion on boredom & its interpersonal consequences. Huge thanks to @stepf.bsky.social & team for the invite 🙏
182