Chris Crandall

Is it useful at all?
Can we learn anything useful?

I don’t think we need completely exclude its use, especially in articles of opinion, analysis, or exhortation.

Is it seriously worth nothing?

This is different from treating 150 undergraduates at a regional state college as the mind of God? Or of 1,000 “randomly chosen” people who wandered over to Project Implicit as the mind of God.

I’m not so sure that using data makes us believe it’s the mind of God.

Why? A claim was made and then refuted. Are you teaching obedience or the history of a controversy about a
Mostly useless study?

There’s a ton of evidence about obedience—why not focus on the best work?

“Replication crisis in social psychology”?

I like this message—the “incentives” model is based on discredited economic models (or worse, unreconstructed Skinnerian models). Doing science for science’s sake—being right first, these are the “incentives” that drive intrinsically motivated folk.

I sympathize with the advice, but that doesn't have to be the take-home message. Implicit measures seem to capture something that explicit measure do not.

What is that something? Worth investigating.
Explicit outperforms in the lab (on explicit discrimination DVs?).

This is remarkable.

If this must happen, you must immediately watch a video . . . put out by Vittorio De Sica.

Is the abstract missing a principal verb? In the sentence which contains "research strategies that explicitly a research design"?

They're just too easy to do.

Money really helps for this sort of thing.

I really support reviewing awards. I proposed them in the PubComm meeting of one of my societies, and they said “that’s what Editorial Boards are for.” I was too junior to push back.

Not all departments and programs, certainly.

I think it does. If it’s not there, one has to worry—do you not carry your share of the load? Are you so un-respected no one ever asks? But it’s a secondary concern.

It counts, for sure. Hiring process involves lots of evaluation, including “will you be a good colleague?” This is one indicator—do you do the unglamorous but essential work?

Mostly not, I agree.

But I did accept review requests from new-for-me journals until I hit 100 different journals. I met my career goal and now review only rarely (also I was Editor of a high volume journal).

This”billions” claim refers only to Elsevier.

Yes. But students should be free to work on their best ideas. It’s good for them, for training & for science, provided the ideas meet a minimum standard. Replication is a strategy for good science but is required of all scientists across time & discipline?
(One’s own work is diff—one must do this.)

“Allow” sounds good. “Require” sounds bad.

The son of Gaia and Tartarus?

Catchy *can* be orthogonal to quality. Milgram & Asch were both. Robber’s Cave was both. (I know some people have “gone after” Milgram and RC, but when you read the complaints, they are evanescent.

Seeking catchiness for its own sake tends to lead to bad science, but good science can be “catchy.”

Wait! It was fun!

OK, it wasn’t. I’ve a selection of personal targets I’m willing to offer, cheap.

Paywalled. Can someone with access offer a tl;dr account?

Darley, J. M., & Batson, C. D. (1973). " From Jerusalem to Jericho": A study of situational and dispositional variables in helping behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 27(1), 100.

Sure.
Praxis is a vast wasteland of bad ideas.

Taken out of context, these ideas easily support autocratic regimes. “What is truth?” An artifice!

It’s key to build an intertidal regime which gives strong guidance for what is better science, better theory, better “belief.” Otherwise it’s RFK, Jr all the way down.

Thanks for all the extra info.

Depends upon “standard” I guess. It won’t show discriminant validity, for sure.

But also, it really does predict some DVs of relationship functioning.

One person’s contaminant is another person’s predictive validity (variant if old saying).

Just need reasonable standards of validation.

Can’t see much on my phone, sorry. Big shift recently toward white students at HKS, plus international students. Maybe not so much in this view. Thx for info.

Yes, very plausible.