As expected, the use of NHST was consistently high (≥96%), while Bayesian was rare (≤ 3%) between 2000 and 2020. The use of effect sizes steadily increased, from 70% in 2000, 86% in 2010, to 94% in 2020. The reporting of CIs showed a large jump between 2010 and 2015 (19%–62%).

We provided a comprehensive snapshot of stats reporting practices in 813 empirical studies published in six prominent forensic psychology journals for the years 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020.

Our new meta-science collaboration on @lhb-apls.bsky.social, Statistical Reporting Practices within Forensic Psychology, under the lead of Dr. Joseph Eastwood, Dr. Kirk Luther @kirkluther.bsky.social, and Dr. Brent Snook. We examined the stats evolution of field over 20 years doi.org/10.1037/lhb0...

Research day! Our honours students Sittara and Sarah presented their thesis. 🎉

Key finding 1:
A balanced message with equal expert comments (3:3) reduced perceived expert consensus on a high-consensus issue (94%). That is, adding balanced commentary alongside data about the weight of evidence distort estimations about the level of expert consensus on this scientific issue.

Propagandists often exploit the notion of "balance" or appeal to "both sides of an issue" as a tactic to cast doubt on facts that challenge their agendas. Even reputable sources sometimes fall prey to the need for balance – “due balance and due impartiality on any subject”.

🚨Out in Applied Cognitive Psychology🚨
The False Balance Effect: Exploring Partition Dependence as a Potential Explanation.
A new empirical study by Tianshuang Han, Dr. Brent Snook, & Dr. Martin V. Day examined a psychological mechanism underlying "bothsidesism". (1/n)

doi.org/10.1002/acp....

Happy New Year!
Check out our new publication Your alibi better not be a-changin' with Joseph Eastwood, Mark Snow, Quintan Crough, Tianshuang Han, Brent Snook, Madi Gregory, Laura Fallon & Chris Lively at Psychology, Crime & Law
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1...

Key finding 2
Balanced messages also reduced the belief that there is sufficient expert consensus to support the use of expert testimony on minimization tactic. Imagine a jury doubting scientific propositions because they heard a "both sides" argument.

Key finding 1:
Balanced messages decreased perceived expert consensus (vs only seeing the survey data), the impact was especially pronounced when the topic had high consensus. False balance undermine perceived expert consensus even when the data of weight of evidence was provided

🚨 Out in Journal of Criminal Psychology🚨
How does "false balance" impact our understanding of scientific consensus? A new study by Tianshuang Han, Brent Snook, & Martin V. Day dives into this, focusing on an issue regarding interrogation practices. Let's break it down.

doi.org/10.1108/JCP-...

1/n