Justin Mogilski
@justinmogilski.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Psychology. I use evolutionary theory to study the conflict resolution strategies of people with multiple intimate partners.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Justin-Mogilski
https://truebut.substack.com?r=25rst1&utm_medium=ios
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Justin-Mogilski
https://truebut.substack.com?r=25rst1&utm_medium=ios
These summarize my key points about infidelity.
November 12, 2025 at 6:43 PM
These summarize my key points about infidelity.
Part 3 is now live 📜
Here, I discuss what we learned about infidelity from our data, and why I think CNM is a better way of having multiple partners than infidelity.
Link and notable excerpts below:
Here, I discuss what we learned about infidelity from our data, and why I think CNM is a better way of having multiple partners than infidelity.
Link and notable excerpts below:
November 12, 2025 at 6:43 PM
Part 3 is now live 📜
Here, I discuss what we learned about infidelity from our data, and why I think CNM is a better way of having multiple partners than infidelity.
Link and notable excerpts below:
Here, I discuss what we learned about infidelity from our data, and why I think CNM is a better way of having multiple partners than infidelity.
Link and notable excerpts below:
I solemnly swear to use this as a cudgel against anyone who makes poor criticisms of DEI programming ⚔️🛡️
September 1, 2025 at 4:58 PM
I solemnly swear to use this as a cudgel against anyone who makes poor criticisms of DEI programming ⚔️🛡️
Based on our review, we make several recommendations to improve the scientific study of DEI programming.
We conclude that everyone (pro- and anti-DEI alike) can do better:
We conclude that everyone (pro- and anti-DEI alike) can do better:
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Based on our review, we make several recommendations to improve the scientific study of DEI programming.
We conclude that everyone (pro- and anti-DEI alike) can do better:
We conclude that everyone (pro- and anti-DEI alike) can do better:
Though, there have been exceptions.
Here in the paper, we review some of these research literatures, and note the strengths and limitations of: affirmative action, Critical Race Theory, and bias reduction interventions (including diversity statements).
Here in the paper, we review some of these research literatures, and note the strengths and limitations of: affirmative action, Critical Race Theory, and bias reduction interventions (including diversity statements).
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Though, there have been exceptions.
Here in the paper, we review some of these research literatures, and note the strengths and limitations of: affirmative action, Critical Race Theory, and bias reduction interventions (including diversity statements).
Here in the paper, we review some of these research literatures, and note the strengths and limitations of: affirmative action, Critical Race Theory, and bias reduction interventions (including diversity statements).
For much of DEI’s history, this has not been how programming was evaluated.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
For much of DEI’s history, this has not been how programming was evaluated.
Having defined, measurable, and standard outcomes permits better testing of DEI programming because it provides common language and procedure for adjudicating which programs are worthwhile, and why.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Having defined, measurable, and standard outcomes permits better testing of DEI programming because it provides common language and procedure for adjudicating which programs are worthwhile, and why.
To assist in this effort, we offer definitions of D, E, and I that are focused on their intended humanitarian outcome.
We arrived at these by reviewing and critiquing several recent popular perspectives. But, of course, these should be modified as scientific consensus shifts.
We arrived at these by reviewing and critiquing several recent popular perspectives. But, of course, these should be modified as scientific consensus shifts.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
To assist in this effort, we offer definitions of D, E, and I that are focused on their intended humanitarian outcome.
We arrived at these by reviewing and critiquing several recent popular perspectives. But, of course, these should be modified as scientific consensus shifts.
We arrived at these by reviewing and critiquing several recent popular perspectives. But, of course, these should be modified as scientific consensus shifts.
This is the meat of the paper:
If you want to test whether something works (or not!), you need to specify how by modeling the network of causal variables presumed to connect independent to dependent variables.
Then, you evaluate competing models.
If you want to test whether something works (or not!), you need to specify how by modeling the network of causal variables presumed to connect independent to dependent variables.
Then, you evaluate competing models.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
This is the meat of the paper:
If you want to test whether something works (or not!), you need to specify how by modeling the network of causal variables presumed to connect independent to dependent variables.
Then, you evaluate competing models.
If you want to test whether something works (or not!), you need to specify how by modeling the network of causal variables presumed to connect independent to dependent variables.
Then, you evaluate competing models.
We contend that these are each reasonable positions but often don’t make contact because DEI is neither standardly defined nor are its outcomes and mechanisms of action standardly evaluated.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
We contend that these are each reasonable positions but often don’t make contact because DEI is neither standardly defined nor are its outcomes and mechanisms of action standardly evaluated.
We first steel man each side’s arguments.
Pro-DEI argues for the humanistic ideals and effectiveness of such programming.
Anti-DEI argues that such programming is ineffective, costly and, at least in some cases, antithetical to its original aims.
Pro-DEI argues for the humanistic ideals and effectiveness of such programming.
Anti-DEI argues that such programming is ineffective, costly and, at least in some cases, antithetical to its original aims.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
We first steel man each side’s arguments.
Pro-DEI argues for the humanistic ideals and effectiveness of such programming.
Anti-DEI argues that such programming is ineffective, costly and, at least in some cases, antithetical to its original aims.
Pro-DEI argues for the humanistic ideals and effectiveness of such programming.
Anti-DEI argues that such programming is ineffective, costly and, at least in some cases, antithetical to its original aims.
Here’s the abstract.
We believe that people who are pro- and anti-DEI are talking past one another.
To fix this, each side ought to 1) focus on specific DEI programs and 2) test the causal mechanisms by which each program is presumed to achieve its intended outcomes.
We believe that people who are pro- and anti-DEI are talking past one another.
To fix this, each side ought to 1) focus on specific DEI programs and 2) test the causal mechanisms by which each program is presumed to achieve its intended outcomes.
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Here’s the abstract.
We believe that people who are pro- and anti-DEI are talking past one another.
To fix this, each side ought to 1) focus on specific DEI programs and 2) test the causal mechanisms by which each program is presumed to achieve its intended outcomes.
We believe that people who are pro- and anti-DEI are talking past one another.
To fix this, each side ought to 1) focus on specific DEI programs and 2) test the causal mechanisms by which each program is presumed to achieve its intended outcomes.
Months ago I began an adversarial collaboration with Drs.
Lee Jussim, Anne Wilson, and Bryan Love to make sense of DEI public discourse.
Today our paper was accepted at Theory & Society.
We suggest a scientific standard for adjudicating the (de)merits of DEI 🧵👇
Lee Jussim, Anne Wilson, and Bryan Love to make sense of DEI public discourse.
Today our paper was accepted at Theory & Society.
We suggest a scientific standard for adjudicating the (de)merits of DEI 🧵👇
August 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Months ago I began an adversarial collaboration with Drs.
Lee Jussim, Anne Wilson, and Bryan Love to make sense of DEI public discourse.
Today our paper was accepted at Theory & Society.
We suggest a scientific standard for adjudicating the (de)merits of DEI 🧵👇
Lee Jussim, Anne Wilson, and Bryan Love to make sense of DEI public discourse.
Today our paper was accepted at Theory & Society.
We suggest a scientific standard for adjudicating the (de)merits of DEI 🧵👇
I’ll be at the Human Behavior and Evolution Society (#HBES2025) and NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society (#NEEPS2025) conferences this week and the following. Looking forward to cracking rocks with ya’ll ;)
Say hi if you see me.
Say hi if you see me.
June 2, 2025 at 1:59 PM
I’ll be at the Human Behavior and Evolution Society (#HBES2025) and NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society (#NEEPS2025) conferences this week and the following. Looking forward to cracking rocks with ya’ll ;)
Say hi if you see me.
Say hi if you see me.
So, they concluded that their therapy based on Sexual Configurations Theory helped minority but overempowered majority.
April 27, 2025 at 7:13 PM
So, they concluded that their therapy based on Sexual Configurations Theory helped minority but overempowered majority.
The participants are ignoring signals from the interviewer to stop. This is more grievous than if the flirting or disclosure were unrequited, and then the participant shut it down.
It's using their power in the research participation contract to solicit sexual gratification or opportunity.
It's using their power in the research participation contract to solicit sexual gratification or opportunity.
April 27, 2025 at 7:13 PM
The participants are ignoring signals from the interviewer to stop. This is more grievous than if the flirting or disclosure were unrequited, and then the participant shut it down.
It's using their power in the research participation contract to solicit sexual gratification or opportunity.
It's using their power in the research participation contract to solicit sexual gratification or opportunity.
In 2021 Sari van Anders published a fascinating piece about diversity in sex/gender research (link below).
The excerpt here is what inspired me to post. I have not seen privilege in social power defined this way before.
This is "overempowerment":
The excerpt here is what inspired me to post. I have not seen privilege in social power defined this way before.
This is "overempowerment":
April 27, 2025 at 7:13 PM
In 2021 Sari van Anders published a fascinating piece about diversity in sex/gender research (link below).
The excerpt here is what inspired me to post. I have not seen privilege in social power defined this way before.
This is "overempowerment":
The excerpt here is what inspired me to post. I have not seen privilege in social power defined this way before.
This is "overempowerment":
Confluence between DEI & meritocracy is the winning strategy.
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
Confluence between DEI & meritocracy is the winning strategy.
Meritocracy is not at odds with DEI.
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
Meritocracy is not at odds with DEI.
My problem with the DEI acronym:
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
My problem with the DEI acronym:
My distillation of DEI as it is currently theorized:
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
My distillation of DEI as it is currently theorized:
The prediction:
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
The prediction:
This is my last entry for “Making Sense of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”.
Here, I revisit the prediction that I made about DEI before reading this book. I then draw my conclusions and levy a few critiques.
I'll leave highlights in the comments.
open.substack.com/pub/justinmo...
Here, I revisit the prediction that I made about DEI before reading this book. I then draw my conclusions and levy a few critiques.
I'll leave highlights in the comments.
open.substack.com/pub/justinmo...
April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM
This is my last entry for “Making Sense of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”.
Here, I revisit the prediction that I made about DEI before reading this book. I then draw my conclusions and levy a few critiques.
I'll leave highlights in the comments.
open.substack.com/pub/justinmo...
Here, I revisit the prediction that I made about DEI before reading this book. I then draw my conclusions and levy a few critiques.
I'll leave highlights in the comments.
open.substack.com/pub/justinmo...
April 5, 2025 at 12:02 AM