This rule also requires that grants must “...demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities.” All of this effectively puts politics over expertise, giving political appointees veto power over research that challenges, conflicts with, or doesn't follow the administration’s ideologies. 5/n
tl,dr; Scientists no longer allowed to use federal funding to publish, attend meetings, or talk to the public. They cannot collaborate internationally. Grants can be cancelled for any reason, at any time, political appointees have a final say over what gets funded, and who gets funded.
“The result is a horror show for US science research. Not only is peer review made a secondary consideration, but the new rules would allow any federal agency to cancel any grant at any time based on the vague assertion that it isn’t in the “national interest.”
1/2 🧪
arstechnica.com/science/2026...
We're recruiting postdocs to study how people build structured knowledge from experience & use it to act flexibly. Behavioral work, fMRI, computational & AI models, with a lifespan focus. You don't need experience with every method; fit & curiosity matter most.
Please repost & share! 🧠
New paper with @mohitmukherji.bsky.social, Mona Lebrun, and @marjorierhodes.bsky.social @JEP:G! Did you ever wonder whether saying things like “boys can wear dresses too” is effective at reducing stereotypical inferences? We find that they’re probably not—check out more here: doi.org/10.1037/xge0...
The drop in support for marriage equality last year was not a blip, it has declined further, dropping 6 points from its high of 71. Whether or not gay or lesbian relations were "morally acceptable" dropped 9 points.
Support for LGBTQ rights broadly is diminishing.
news.gallup.com/poll/710810/...
