Brian Nosek
@briannosek.bsky.social
Co-founder of Project Implicit, Society for Improving Psychological Science, and the Center for Open Science; Professor at the University of Virginia
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Jim Ryan is a man of incredible character and this is a deeply troubling read. Gov. Spanberger and the legislature need to get those three members of the board to resign and reevaluate the university and state's ties with McGuireWoods drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
11.14.25_JER Resignation Facuty.pdf
drive.google.com
November 14, 2025 at 2:49 PM
Jim Ryan is a man of incredible character and this is a deeply troubling read. Gov. Spanberger and the legislature need to get those three members of the board to resign and reevaluate the university and state's ties with McGuireWoods drive.google.com/file/d/1Is6x...
“Stubborn and principled often look the same, especially to those who are unprincipled.” -- Jim Ryan
November 14, 2025 at 5:13 PM
“Stubborn and principled often look the same, especially to those who are unprincipled.” -- Jim Ryan
Reposted by Brian Nosek
When you share a preprint on #PsyArXiv, it becomes discoverable through
Google Scholar,
@europepmc.org
OpenAlex
@dimensions.ai
OSF Preprints
@crossref.bsky.social Metadata Search
@orcid.org
and more!
blog.psyarxiv.com/2025/11/10/d... by Andrea Schuler
#AcademicSky #OpenScience
@improvingpsych.org
Google Scholar,
@europepmc.org
OpenAlex
@dimensions.ai
OSF Preprints
@crossref.bsky.social Metadata Search
@orcid.org
and more!
blog.psyarxiv.com/2025/11/10/d... by Andrea Schuler
#AcademicSky #OpenScience
@improvingpsych.org
Discovering research from PsyArXiv – PsyArXiv Blog
When you share a preprint in PsyArXiv it becomes available for a worldwide audience to read, share, and cite. Readers may access your work via its DOI, by searching the PsyArXiv site, or by discoverin...
blog.psyarxiv.com
November 10, 2025 at 6:55 PM
When you share a preprint on #PsyArXiv, it becomes discoverable through
Google Scholar,
@europepmc.org
OpenAlex
@dimensions.ai
OSF Preprints
@crossref.bsky.social Metadata Search
@orcid.org
and more!
blog.psyarxiv.com/2025/11/10/d... by Andrea Schuler
#AcademicSky #OpenScience
@improvingpsych.org
Google Scholar,
@europepmc.org
OpenAlex
@dimensions.ai
OSF Preprints
@crossref.bsky.social Metadata Search
@orcid.org
and more!
blog.psyarxiv.com/2025/11/10/d... by Andrea Schuler
#AcademicSky #OpenScience
@improvingpsych.org
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Join the virtual SIPS@SPSP 2026: Community Action Meeting — “Improving Open Science Resources for Social-Personality Psychology.”
💡 Topics: Registered reports, open data, replications, diversity & inclusion
🧠 Hands-on sessions + hackathons
🌍 All career stages welcome!
🔗
💡 Topics: Registered reports, open data, replications, diversity & inclusion
🧠 Hands-on sessions + hackathons
🌍 All career stages welcome!
🔗
Preconferences | SPSP
Explore SPSP Annual Convention preconferences—specialized sessions offering in-depth insights, networking, and collaboration in personality and social psychology.
buff.ly
November 5, 2025 at 12:03 PM
Join the virtual SIPS@SPSP 2026: Community Action Meeting — “Improving Open Science Resources for Social-Personality Psychology.”
💡 Topics: Registered reports, open data, replications, diversity & inclusion
🧠 Hands-on sessions + hackathons
🌍 All career stages welcome!
🔗
💡 Topics: Registered reports, open data, replications, diversity & inclusion
🧠 Hands-on sessions + hackathons
🌍 All career stages welcome!
🔗
The universal agreement among commenters throughout was that our collective time to shine is represented by the bottom right cell. Congrats to all of us for making it on to the alignment chart!
Thus concludes reality distraction strategy #822.
Thus concludes reality distraction strategy #822.
November 13, 2025 at 12:57 PM
The universal agreement among commenters throughout was that our collective time to shine is represented by the bottom right cell. Congrats to all of us for making it on to the alignment chart!
Thus concludes reality distraction strategy #822.
Thus concludes reality distraction strategy #822.
Reposted by Brian Nosek
Sage webinar on Registered Reports (RRs/RRRs)! I'm excited to participate, and if you have any curiosity about writing a RR or reviewing a RR, please consider joining the webinar. Spread the word-- thanks! @psychscience.bsky.social
📢 Join our upcoming Registered Reports webinar!
Don't miss out on this opportunity to enhance your research! We will cover the following topics:
- Two-stage review explained
- Tips for Stage 1 protocols
- Common author challenges
Register now: https://ow.ly/R6yH50Xptt0 #RegisteredReports #Webinar
Don't miss out on this opportunity to enhance your research! We will cover the following topics:
- Two-stage review explained
- Tips for Stage 1 protocols
- Common author challenges
Register now: https://ow.ly/R6yH50Xptt0 #RegisteredReports #Webinar
Welcome! You are invited to join a webinar: How to Do Research and Get Published - How to Write & Review Registered Reports. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the webinar.
This webinar will provide an overview of the Registered Reports format, a publishing model designed to improve transparency and reproducibility in scientific research. The session will cover the structure and purpose of Registered Reports, including the two-stage submission and review process. Presenters will discuss how to develop a Stage 1 protocol, what reviewers typically evaluate at Stage 1 and 2, and common challenges encountered by authors and reviewers. The webinar is intended for researchers, editors, and reviewers who are working with or considering Registered Reports.
Hosted by...
ow.ly
November 10, 2025 at 8:55 PM
Sage webinar on Registered Reports (RRs/RRRs)! I'm excited to participate, and if you have any curiosity about writing a RR or reviewing a RR, please consider joining the webinar. Spread the word-- thanks! @psychscience.bsky.social
Wrapping up the final row all at once: What papers to you are prototype examples of having huge, moderate, or minimal citation impact and also minimal actual impact, in whatever way you define actual impact?
November 12, 2025 at 12:08 PM
Wrapping up the final row all at once: What papers to you are prototype examples of having huge, moderate, or minimal citation impact and also minimal actual impact, in whatever way you define actual impact?
This lesson applies broadly. One can be working to dismantle or reform a system without also being hostile or antagonistic.
In fact, an open, positive approach invites engagement and inclusion, even of those that have questions or misgivings.
In fact, an open, positive approach invites engagement and inclusion, even of those that have questions or misgivings.
This point absolutely correct and I will add that Mamdani demonstrates that an insurgency, even one with real moral clarity and anger at the status quo, can still be cheerful and inviting.
November 11, 2025 at 1:34 PM
This lesson applies broadly. One can be working to dismantle or reform a system without also being hostile or antagonistic.
In fact, an open, positive approach invites engagement and inclusion, even of those that have questions or misgivings.
In fact, an open, positive approach invites engagement and inclusion, even of those that have questions or misgivings.
Ericsson & Simon (1980) takes the middle cell psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-...
Now, your nominations for minimal citation impact but moderate actual impact?
A contribution that altered policy or practice...
A paper that extinguished an active area of research...
An uncredited gem...
Now, your nominations for minimal citation impact but moderate actual impact?
A contribution that altered policy or practice...
A paper that extinguished an active area of research...
An uncredited gem...
November 11, 2025 at 1:28 PM
Ericsson & Simon (1980) takes the middle cell psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-...
Now, your nominations for minimal citation impact but moderate actual impact?
A contribution that altered policy or practice...
A paper that extinguished an active area of research...
An uncredited gem...
Now, your nominations for minimal citation impact but moderate actual impact?
A contribution that altered policy or practice...
A paper that extinguished an active area of research...
An uncredited gem...
Hu & Bentler (1999) with >130k citations selected for huge citation and moderate actual impact--see Nils' rationale that a lot of citation use is unthinking or to stop thinking.
What then is the prototype of prototypes for the moderate citation impact and moderate actual impact?
What then is the prototype of prototypes for the moderate citation impact and moderate actual impact?
November 10, 2025 at 12:18 PM
Hu & Bentler (1999) with >130k citations selected for huge citation and moderate actual impact--see Nils' rationale that a lot of citation use is unthinking or to stop thinking.
What then is the prototype of prototypes for the moderate citation impact and moderate actual impact?
What then is the prototype of prototypes for the moderate citation impact and moderate actual impact?
Reposted by Brian Nosek
My Shiny app containing 3530 Open Science blog posts discussing the replication crisis is updated - you can now use the SEARCH box. I fixed it as my new PhD Julia wanted to know who had called open scientists 'Methodological Terrorists' :) shiny.ieis.tue.nl/open_science...
Open Science Blog Browser
Open Science Blog Browser
shiny.ieis.tue.nl
November 8, 2025 at 7:15 PM
My Shiny app containing 3530 Open Science blog posts discussing the replication crisis is updated - you can now use the SEARCH box. I fixed it as my new PhD Julia wanted to know who had called open scientists 'Methodological Terrorists' :) shiny.ieis.tue.nl/open_science...
Youyou Tu's work on anti-malarial compounds that saved millions of lives (w/Nobel+Lasker recognition) wins the low citation/huge impact cell. The original paper has 87 citations as of today: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11721477/ Hopefully she can get to 100.
What for huge citations and moderate impact?
What for huge citations and moderate impact?
November 8, 2025 at 12:31 PM
Youyou Tu's work on anti-malarial compounds that saved millions of lives (w/Nobel+Lasker recognition) wins the low citation/huge impact cell. The original paper has 87 citations as of today: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11721477/ Hopefully she can get to 100.
What for huge citations and moderate impact?
What for huge citations and moderate impact?
An off-the-wall example that I love is Schwartz (2008) "The importance of stupidity in research" It does not break scientific ground, but it is a "most shared" work for addressing imposter syndrome. Beautiful paper.
journals.biologists.com/jcs/article/...
journals.biologists.com/jcs/article/...
November 7, 2025 at 1:21 PM
An off-the-wall example that I love is Schwartz (2008) "The importance of stupidity in research" It does not break scientific ground, but it is a "most shared" work for addressing imposter syndrome. Beautiful paper.
journals.biologists.com/jcs/article/...
journals.biologists.com/jcs/article/...
With 2508 citations in 127 years, Student (1908) introducing the t-test wins for huge actual impact with moderate citation impact: www.jstor.org/stable/23315...
Now, how about huge actual impact and minimal citation impact?
Now, how about huge actual impact and minimal citation impact?
November 7, 2025 at 11:49 AM
With 2508 citations in 127 years, Student (1908) introducing the t-test wins for huge actual impact with moderate citation impact: www.jstor.org/stable/23315...
Now, how about huge actual impact and minimal citation impact?
Now, how about huge actual impact and minimal citation impact?
Reposted by Brian Nosek
"“Just Noticeable” Differences in Pay: A Systematic Review of Past Accomplishments and Future Opportunities", an Outcomes Report in Lifecycle Journal, is under review with
@researchhubf.bsky.social Check it out if you'd like to be part of the evaluation process! www.researchhub.com/paper/961814...
@researchhubf.bsky.social Check it out if you'd like to be part of the evaluation process! www.researchhub.com/paper/961814...
“Just Noticeable” Differences in Pay: A Systematic Review...
Compensation is of critical importance to organizations. Howev...
www.researchhub.com
November 7, 2025 at 12:14 AM
"“Just Noticeable” Differences in Pay: A Systematic Review of Past Accomplishments and Future Opportunities", an Outcomes Report in Lifecycle Journal, is under review with
@researchhubf.bsky.social Check it out if you'd like to be part of the evaluation process! www.researchhub.com/paper/961814...
@researchhubf.bsky.social Check it out if you'd like to be part of the evaluation process! www.researchhub.com/paper/961814...
Incredible thread summarizing Ellis's ruling.
Greetings from the Dirksen federal courthouse, where U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis has just taken the bench to rule on federal agents actions' during a series of increasingly aggressive raids across Chicago and the suburbs.
Background, for @wttw.bsky.social from @bymattmasterson.bsky.social
Background, for @wttw.bsky.social from @bymattmasterson.bsky.social
Judge Set to Rule Thursday in Case Centering on Federal Immigration Agents’ Use of Force: ‘I Could See Inside the Barrel’
Protesters, clergy members and others who say they’ve been directly impacted by a series of increasingly aggressive raids across Chicago and the suburbs will testify before a federal judge weighing wh...
news.wttw.com
November 6, 2025 at 5:00 PM
Incredible thread summarizing Ellis's ruling.
Reposted by Brian Nosek
We’ve been heads down @ArcadiaScience for a bit but the @arenabioworks news this week caused me to dump thoughts. hard things are hard; don’t be such a fucking hater. Reflections on parallels w our own institutional experiment here seemay.substack.com/p/big-experi...
Big experiments are only big if they can fail
Some reflections on Arena Bioworks' unexpected wind down as a fellow institutional experimentalist
seemay.substack.com
November 6, 2025 at 4:20 PM
We’ve been heads down @ArcadiaScience for a bit but the @arenabioworks news this week caused me to dump thoughts. hard things are hard; don’t be such a fucking hater. Reflections on parallels w our own institutional experiment here seemay.substack.com/p/big-experi...
Not to this example’s extreme, but initial stylized demonstrations will usually be low rigor. Might there be opportunity to reinvent intro psych to be grounded more in cumulative knowledge rather than recounting historical (and sometimes problematic) demonstrations?
Ouch
November 6, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Not to this example’s extreme, but initial stylized demonstrations will usually be low rigor. Might there be opportunity to reinvent intro psych to be grounded more in cumulative knowledge rather than recounting historical (and sometimes problematic) demonstrations?
Tversky & Kahneman (1974) wins for huge citation and actual impact: www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1...
Now, what paper had a moderate citation impact but a huge actual impact?
Now, what paper had a moderate citation impact but a huge actual impact?
November 6, 2025 at 11:53 AM
Tversky & Kahneman (1974) wins for huge citation and actual impact: www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1...
Now, what paper had a moderate citation impact but a huge actual impact?
Now, what paper had a moderate citation impact but a huge actual impact?
My nomination: Tversky & Kahneman (1974) www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1...
November 5, 2025 at 2:54 PM
My nomination: Tversky & Kahneman (1974) www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1...
Citation impact and actual impact are not the same thing. What is the prototypical paper from the social-behavioral sciences that had both a huge citation impact and a huge actual (by your definition) impact?
Vote by naming a paper or liking someone else's nomination. One box filled per day.
Vote by naming a paper or liking someone else's nomination. One box filled per day.
November 5, 2025 at 2:33 PM
Citation impact and actual impact are not the same thing. What is the prototypical paper from the social-behavioral sciences that had both a huge citation impact and a huge actual (by your definition) impact?
Vote by naming a paper or liking someone else's nomination. One box filled per day.
Vote by naming a paper or liking someone else's nomination. One box filled per day.
Reposted by Brian Nosek
A reminder:
NSF makes you say who you got conflicts (coauthored) with. We (really just Jordan Matelsky) just built you a tool for that. Literally one click: bib.experiments.kordinglab.com/nsf-coa
NSF COA | Jordan Matelsky
bib.experiments.kordinglab.com
November 4, 2025 at 12:07 PM
A reminder:
Reposted by Brian Nosek
"The advent of large language models have made this type of content relatively easy to churn out on demand, and the majority of the review articles we receive are little more than annotated bibliographies, with no substantial discussion of open research issues."
arXiv will no longer accept review articles and position papers unless they have been accepted at a journal or a conference and complete successful peer review.
This is due to being overwhelmed by a hundreds of AI generated papers a month.
Yet another open submission process killed by LLMs.
This is due to being overwhelmed by a hundreds of AI generated papers a month.
Yet another open submission process killed by LLMs.
Attention Authors: Updated Practice for Review Articles and Position Papers in arXiv CS Category – arXiv blog
blog.arxiv.org
November 2, 2025 at 7:51 AM
"The advent of large language models have made this type of content relatively easy to churn out on demand, and the majority of the review articles we receive are little more than annotated bibliographies, with no substantial discussion of open research issues."
I love asking the question: how much should be spent on scientific replication? When asked, I have suggested that 1-2% of a funding budget felt right. "Felt right" meaning no evidence basis other than intuition.
@jdworkin.bsky.social offers a much more thoughtful approach.
@jdworkin.bsky.social offers a much more thoughtful approach.
How Much Should We Spend on Scientific Replication? | IFP
A data-driven framework for targeting replication funding where it matters most
ifp.org
October 31, 2025 at 7:40 PM
I love asking the question: how much should be spent on scientific replication? When asked, I have suggested that 1-2% of a funding budget felt right. "Felt right" meaning no evidence basis other than intuition.
@jdworkin.bsky.social offers a much more thoughtful approach.
@jdworkin.bsky.social offers a much more thoughtful approach.