that's really interesting. Do you think this will be different in the next cohort, who grew up with computer games and many of who continue to play computer games? (I do).

That's my question, too -- especially after the "again" in the post. Are you long-term monitoring foot offers on Temu?

Isn't that the worst feeling? I know there's something I urgently need to do, but what could it be?

yeah -- and it feels frivolous to post something else right now. We'd love to share news about a recent paper for example but it feels really weird against the current backdrop.

There’s much more in the paper! Steve and I look forward to your thoughts in the peer commentary that will come with the article (the call for commentaries will come out soon). You can find the paper here: doi.org/10.1017/S014... and preprint here: osf.io/preprints/ps....

Mostly matches mine, with the exception of Last Rites at the top, and Process before Rabies. The post-Dwayne/reunion stuff didn't really do much for me. Felt too clean.

I assume you know their Download sideproject? The early stuff (Furnace, Eyes of Stanley Pain) might be up your alley.

Yes, for this it would be ideal.

I was wondering more in general, though, because this comes up over and over, and even students ask: Am I really allowed to run a (planned) t-test between two conditions even if the ANOVA is not significant. It would be good to have a resource to point them to.

... I don't have to run a full 3-level ANOVA first before being allowed to do this?

Conventional wisdom seems to be that paired tests, even if theoretically motivated, are only allowed after the ANOVA has shown there is some difference between conditions.

Any references etc would appreciated.