Veli-Matti Karhulahti
@mkarhulahti.bsky.social
science, gaming, art (senior researcher at university of jyväskylä)
One of my all-time fav rants on this topic-- especially love this figure demonstrating how expert clinicians fail to agree on major depression diagnosis most of the time (57%) based on DSM5 field trials
November 1, 2025 at 7:20 PM
One of my all-time fav rants on this topic-- especially love this figure demonstrating how expert clinicians fail to agree on major depression diagnosis most of the time (57%) based on DSM5 field trials
This is a brilliant slide & captures a core dynamic of information transfer in science not only for methods but also domain knowledge, theory, and everything else --gap from cutting edge to ZPD will always remain huge; core work in a field will always happen in-between
October 22, 2025 at 7:21 PM
This is a brilliant slide & captures a core dynamic of information transfer in science not only for methods but also domain knowledge, theory, and everything else --gap from cutting edge to ZPD will always remain huge; core work in a field will always happen in-between
Every chapter in this philosophy of psychiatry monument is pure joy & gold-- today it was @ent3c.bsky.social 's reply to Borsboom, and it resonates not only with psychopathology but also what's happening in social sciences more widely
academic.oup.com/book/25042
academic.oup.com/book/25042
October 16, 2025 at 7:29 PM
Every chapter in this philosophy of psychiatry monument is pure joy & gold-- today it was @ent3c.bsky.social 's reply to Borsboom, and it resonates not only with psychopathology but also what's happening in social sciences more widely
academic.oup.com/book/25042
academic.oup.com/book/25042
there's also a plan to provide a bonus for universities publishing in diamond journals -- not sure how this will play out but could be very welcome if it's implemented in the right way (i've personally always called for open/published review bonuses but they're not mentioned)
October 15, 2025 at 9:04 PM
there's also a plan to provide a bonus for universities publishing in diamond journals -- not sure how this will play out but could be very welcome if it's implemented in the right way (i've personally always called for open/published review bonuses but they're not mentioned)
another fun update is to block closed society journals from level 2 if membership is required for some submissions -- not sure who it'll be interpreted but likely (hopefully) it means that journals like PNAS go down to basic level 1 too
October 15, 2025 at 9:04 PM
another fun update is to block closed society journals from level 2 if membership is required for some submissions -- not sure who it'll be interpreted but likely (hopefully) it means that journals like PNAS go down to basic level 1 too
starting 2026 the ranking will go from 0-1-2-3 to O-1-2 where O=unranked 1=basic 2=good journals, and to be a good journal it must offer *immediate* OA -- hence, eg all nature portfolio journals seem to go down to basic 1 (!)
October 15, 2025 at 9:04 PM
starting 2026 the ranking will go from 0-1-2-3 to O-1-2 where O=unranked 1=basic 2=good journals, and to be a good journal it must offer *immediate* OA -- hence, eg all nature portfolio journals seem to go down to basic 1 (!)
"influential and highly cited [machine learning] articles may reside solely on preprint servers without undergoing formal publication"-- curious how much this actually happens in the machine learning community, sounds amazing if truly meaningful papers are intentionally never submitted anywhere
September 3, 2025 at 4:55 PM
"influential and highly cited [machine learning] articles may reside solely on preprint servers without undergoing formal publication"-- curious how much this actually happens in the machine learning community, sounds amazing if truly meaningful papers are intentionally never submitted anywhere
Finnish social science data archive does this & sends annual reports with not only how much it's used but also published outcomes (example here my 2024 report -- knowing that eg 9 MA + 1 phd was done with them adds motivation to share)
August 16, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Finnish social science data archive does this & sends annual reports with not only how much it's used but also published outcomes (example here my 2024 report -- knowing that eg 9 MA + 1 phd was done with them adds motivation to share)
I see it via gatekeeping and improving functions which indeed differ btw empirically and philosophically oriented work. Alas, when one talks to most orgs, they tend to only see gatekeeping (which can make sense in their context)
July 12, 2025 at 10:08 AM
I see it via gatekeeping and improving functions which indeed differ btw empirically and philosophically oriented work. Alas, when one talks to most orgs, they tend to only see gatekeeping (which can make sense in their context)
I recall how they even had to start removing pentagrams from art, games, etc -- what had been a cultural meme started having meanings beyond control (the pattern keeps repeating today)
July 10, 2025 at 5:30 PM
I recall how they even had to start removing pentagrams from art, games, etc -- what had been a cultural meme started having meanings beyond control (the pattern keeps repeating today)
One of the better teenage memories from the 90s was playing the adventure game that no one remembers, beavis & butt-head -- the subtitle was "virtual stupidity" and it was totally worthy of its name
July 8, 2025 at 9:43 PM
One of the better teenage memories from the 90s was playing the adventure game that no one remembers, beavis & butt-head -- the subtitle was "virtual stupidity" and it was totally worthy of its name
In a recent Clearer Thinking episode by @spencrgreenberg.bsky.social a listener asks about the Transparent Replications project that has now completed 12 replications of new prestige journal papers. Spencer's reply is interesting (yet unsurprising) /4
replications.clearerthinking.org/replications/
replications.clearerthinking.org/replications/
July 4, 2025 at 2:24 PM
In a recent Clearer Thinking episode by @spencrgreenberg.bsky.social a listener asks about the Transparent Replications project that has now completed 12 replications of new prestige journal papers. Spencer's reply is interesting (yet unsurprising) /4
replications.clearerthinking.org/replications/
replications.clearerthinking.org/replications/
Guess what happens when you tap? No shit, it actives purchase! You don't even know what you're buying -- or that you're in a business of buying to begin with. Tapping "info" just throws you to finalising a purchase that you never wanted or don't even know exists ☠️ 3/4
June 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Guess what happens when you tap? No shit, it actives purchase! You don't even know what you're buying -- or that you're in a business of buying to begin with. Tapping "info" just throws you to finalising a purchase that you never wanted or don't even know exists ☠️ 3/4
On the surface, this is a common chained reward design. Tapping gives free reward & access to next reward, the chain continues until it's time for "paid reward" which must be purchased typically for 3-4€. However, notice how in this one "free" has been replaced with "tap for info" 2/4
June 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
On the surface, this is a common chained reward design. Tapping gives free reward & access to next reward, the chain continues until it's time for "paid reward" which must be purchased typically for 3-4€. However, notice how in this one "free" has been replaced with "tap for info" 2/4
Sad to see how the gaming industry has slowly become like the gambling industry in multiple ways. Today learned about yet another new scam by Supercell in an app targeted for users aged 9+. See this pic... /4
June 8, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Sad to see how the gaming industry has slowly become like the gambling industry in multiple ways. Today learned about yet another new scam by Supercell in an app targeted for users aged 9+. See this pic... /4
New report from the Finnish journal index, which evaluates its own use (abstract is in English). Apparently many people are happy with the system, alas it seems to be applied for individual evaluation still (not allowed) & there must be some selection bias in respondents
zenodo.org/records/1500...
zenodo.org/records/1500...
May 22, 2025 at 5:32 PM
New report from the Finnish journal index, which evaluates its own use (abstract is in English). Apparently many people are happy with the system, alas it seems to be applied for individual evaluation still (not allowed) & there must be some selection bias in respondents
zenodo.org/records/1500...
zenodo.org/records/1500...
I'd go one more step further and say we don't even know what gaming or gambling are & we're never going to have consensus on either
May 19, 2025 at 2:56 PM
I'd go one more step further and say we don't even know what gaming or gambling are & we're never going to have consensus on either
as a bonus, the authors back then really knew how to kick off a paper
May 7, 2025 at 8:25 PM
as a bonus, the authors back then really knew how to kick off a paper
We've been doing a deep dive into medical case studies on gaming & gotta love papers like this in BMJ that in 1982 realise how Space Invader epilepsy is a misnomer: "we suggest, therefore, that Astro Fighter and Dark Warrior epilepsy be classified under Electronic Space War Video Game Epilepsy"
May 7, 2025 at 8:24 PM
We've been doing a deep dive into medical case studies on gaming & gotta love papers like this in BMJ that in 1982 realise how Space Invader epilepsy is a misnomer: "we suggest, therefore, that Astro Fighter and Dark Warrior epilepsy be classified under Electronic Space War Video Game Epilepsy"
I thought about this too during the talk (and over the past years in general). We recently ended up framing it like this
osf.io/preprints/ps...
osf.io/preprints/ps...
May 6, 2025 at 8:02 PM
I thought about this too during the talk (and over the past years in general). We recently ended up framing it like this
osf.io/preprints/ps...
osf.io/preprints/ps...
In 1982 ppl complaining how modern arcade games don't compare to good old mechanical pinball but come with fake noises and don't allow cheating or even letting aggressions out
May 3, 2025 at 5:13 PM
In 1982 ppl complaining how modern arcade games don't compare to good old mechanical pinball but come with fake noises and don't allow cheating or even letting aggressions out
Read an old paper & learned fun things about scientific publishing in the 1970s. Apparently readers could fill out a small quiz after reading and send it via snail mail to earn course credit. Not OA but available in microform too!
April 19, 2025 at 1:29 PM
Read an old paper & learned fun things about scientific publishing in the 1970s. Apparently readers could fill out a small quiz after reading and send it via snail mail to earn course credit. Not OA but available in microform too!
Most publishers use min 2 reviewers. That's also a min by FIN guidelines. Springer has dropped its reviewer min to 1; editors can accept w only 1 reviewer in the entire process! -> Next week I'll propose discarding all Springer journals to lvl 0 in Publication Forum meeting (curious to see how goes)
March 16, 2025 at 3:47 PM
Most publishers use min 2 reviewers. That's also a min by FIN guidelines. Springer has dropped its reviewer min to 1; editors can accept w only 1 reviewer in the entire process! -> Next week I'll propose discarding all Springer journals to lvl 0 in Publication Forum meeting (curious to see how goes)
the tool has 23 addictive features, including stuff like "realism". It's like deconstructing a beer and saying carbs, proteins, niacin, alcohol, sodium... are all addictive. Literally a list of everything & the claim is, the more elements the more addictive (it's made to be used by total score)
March 11, 2025 at 6:10 PM
the tool has 23 addictive features, including stuff like "realism". It's like deconstructing a beer and saying carbs, proteins, niacin, alcohol, sodium... are all addictive. Literally a list of everything & the claim is, the more elements the more addictive (it's made to be used by total score)