//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...
Director of the Survey Research Center ‪@um-src.bsky.social Univ. of Michigan Dev/Quant. Prof. of Psychology. APS President-elect. Longitudinal researchers studying SES, parenting, math dev, achievement, and data science. Open science supporter.
Pam Davis-Kean, PhD









Loading...
Update: The flag on Princeton's grants was removed on June 4, around the same time NSF got this letter from Democrats on the House Science Committee, demanding details. democrats-science.house.gov/imo/media/do...
3d
Dan Garisto
Our research is not to inform policymakers, and that will be considered out of scope for NIH funding. This scoping change is already being used during review after the scientific peer review. Notices of “renegotiation” or “rescoping” may be sent to researchers related to this issue
Getting the word out on NIH scoping changes announced yesterday at ASHEcon. As noted on June 8th by the NIH Director, Jay Bhattacharya, grants should not be geared toward policymakers but toward stakeholders who directly benefit from NIH researchers:
patients, doctors/health care workers, hospitals, and public health.