Thank goodness for factor analysis

Got it. Yeah I misinterpreted many of these as implying the methods are relatively useless rather than the frustration with how they are commonly misused. Here I at least partly blame editors and reviewers for not asking the “so what” questions before accepting such papers.

I think the most important point in your post is the ending comment: “without other corroborating information, I wouldn’t be making strong claims.” Isn’t this true of any method?

#3 confuses me. Isn’t this simply a misuse of a method not an inherent part of it? Isn’t one advantage of these analyses that they are model-based so that classes remain latent when you run subsequent latent class regressions etc?

Now do “averagarian” methods…

Author 9 would suggest otherwise:
pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10....

Get it. My complaint is that many requests for mtgs I receive are not about things that take much intellectual effort. In fact some can be answered yes or no! And absolutely agree we have too many emails and intrusions, so no easy answers here.

Should be a new personality dimension of Big 5/6 (Meetingism?). I, and many others I know, loathe the need for calls/mtgs when written text should suffice. Mtgs are important for connectedness of course, but you know anything in person is gonna quadruple the time commitment so it better be worth it!

Would be good to alert AU to fix this sentence in their summary: “Cutting annual public R&D spending in half would making the average American approximately $10,000 poorer.”

Exactly!
The people who are being fired did everything right to achieve the American Dream. They worked hard to get qualifications for a career that gave them a decent living and, bonus, served the community. To see them discarded like this should outrage all of us!!