Three concrete recommendations that we make in our manuscript (osf.io/preprints/me...) on Acknowledgment sections:
1. Include ORCID numbers in parentheses after names of individuals in Acknowledgments. This will disambiguate their identities so that scholarly databases can index them.
Important reminder why survey results examining the % of people who believe in conspiracies should not directly be interpreted as the % of people who believe in conspiracies. Respondents don't all answer seriously, so the news that 12 million people believe in lizard people is not accurate.
if you're really curious about the true state of reality, click below for the latest from @matthewmatix.bsky.social @scicomguy.bsky.social @srhastraea.bsky.social @lingtax.bsky.social @robert-m-ross.bsky.social @eddieclarke.bsky.social, Martin, and me reported in the @aunz.theconversation.com
It's alive! ๐
๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฎ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ป๐ฎ๐น๐๐๐'๐ ๐๐๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ ๐๐ผ ๐๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ณ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ is out -- an introduction to causal inference in practice.
The first two chapters are available for free here: theissbendixen.com/dag-book/
More below ๐
Glad to see this finally out! Grateful to have been part of such a large collaborative effort:
โจ๏ธ Effects of Psychological Distance on Mental Abstraction: A Registered Report of Four Tests of Construal-Level Theory
๐ Out now in AMPPS
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
We have a new preprint that underscores some key claims here: even if one *can* design an agent that gets through a survey fine, it doesn't follow that such agents are undetectable or common. We find that they are far from common! Preprint link in thread๐
You ever try the 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes test' and wonder, how is that any of them?!
Surveys may overestimate belief in conspiracy theories because of trolls and jokers โ but genuine believers can still cause real-world harm.
Psychological scientists are determined to figure out the best practices for online surveys, whoโor whatโis behind bad data, and how to best protect surveys from the new and emerging threat of #AI. @justinsulik.bsky.social
Concerns about bots answering online surveys are exaggerated, but a new threat is emerging in artificial intelligence agents.
In a new study my collaborators and I focus on this alternative hypothesis. We asked participants if this statement is true or false: โThe Canadian Armed Forces have been secretly developing an elite army of genetically engineered, super intelligent, giant raccoons to invade nearby countriesโ.
