Alex Coppock

Also, friends, reviewers, editors -- please be willing to publish experimental estimates of the effects of anti-corruption messages on vote choice even if the "theory isn't novel" or "so and so already published on the effects of anti-corruption."

This is an impt. estimand; we need many estimates!

Here's hoping for dozens and dozens of experimental estimates of the effects of anti-corruption messages on vote choice.

We now have enough studies of populist messages for a meta-analysis (papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....); maybe soon we'll be able to do the same for anti-corruption?

ever so slightly on the nose, eh?

ashamed as a sometime Minnesotan that I had to look up Ski U Mah!!

plot of reconstructed data

The Speech of man is one of the most obvious of his social activi- tics. O u r educational systems lean heavily on the presumption that speech is a vital tool in the stimulation of individual development. T h e lawyer and theologian carry on their work almost entirely through the use of speech. The zealous protection of the right of freedom of speech in democratic societies may be said to be based on the premise that where men do not enjoy freedom of speech they .soon become slaves. Millions of dollars are spent annually by advertisers with a naive faith in the power of the word to convince men and move them to action. The use of speech by man is a psy- chological phenomenon unique in the world of subjects for scientific rtudy. Yet in spite of all these facts, one finds surprisingly few re- ports in the scientific literature of objective measurements of the actual effects of the use of speech on the social environment.

the table that provides the stats

(prohibition) persuasion in parallel

Had fun reconstructing the data from this 90-year old persuasion experiment that shows that "wet" and "dry" college students update their attitudes in the direction of counterattitudinal persuasive information.

paper: doi.org/10.1080/0022...

I agree that we learn from this study that the causal effect of asking for formula (relative to not asking) on getting formula is positive (and that it varies by religious institution!!)

I just mean she's not randomizing something else, like signaling religious affiliation vs not.

Islamic Center of Charlotte in Charlotte NC. Would help feed a starving baby no hesitation 🥰🥰🥰 #fyp #fypシ #fypシ゚viral #testingyourchurch #church #faith #religion #baby #hungrybabytest #viral #viralvid... TikTok video by Nikalie 🌈

Audit experimenters of Bluesky... did you know there's a creator on TikTok who is calling churches, synagogues, and mosques asking if they have baby formula for her two month old?

This is a "one condition" study (no causal inference) but hoo boy the descriptives...

www.tiktok.com/@nikalie.mon...

A Clutch of Vampires: These Being Among the Best from H… Dark red hard cover by Bell Publishing, 1974. Gilt lett…

www.goodreads.com/book/show/14...

I'm also prickly about the idea that survey experiments reveal which messages "poll well" in some kind of popularism sense.

They just tell you which message has the highest ATE on vote choice, which may or may not be the messages that people "like" the most

I've summed up what I personally know about attention here. I don't yet think we have the design worked out like we do vote the ATEs on vote choice. But I don't think a better experimental design is out of reach, I just don't think we've coordinated on it yet.

I'm one of those academics who measure message persuasiveness via survey experiment. I think it's absolutely the right method for doing so.

I think the response to this good point from @anatosaurus.bsky.social is not to abandon survey exps but instead to measure "getting heard" (attention) also.

will no one think of the visualizers [smh]

lol at the MPSA shade in the last line of the FAQ

I suppose that first paper might have been the weirdo alpha of the time we make a type I error, but I suspect error rates here are not nominal...

Whoa that VOLCANO! (did you get the underlying data?)

Maybe your texts tell you to "BE A VOTER" like mine.

It all started because of a PNAS paper that claimed that the noun form it increased voter turnout (relative to the verb form ) by 11 to 14 percentage points.

It keeps not replicating, obviously.

Most recently doi.org/10.1017/bpp....

love this idea and I see your design problem re: significance on both sides of zero.

I think conditioning on significance from a one-tailed p-value would really make the point so well!

the c&H comic

obligatory C&H

a good figure that skewers an "anonymous" reviewer for requiring many citations to (presumably) their work

Thank you for sharing -- I was unaware of this framework for choosing among replication targets. I think I stand with the critics. Of course I'm left still not knowing how to choose among empirical estimands!

Separately, this figure is amazing:

Truly! and thats *among* the studies that didn't already post their data.

Easily a majority of the studies in this area were already public.

Journal policy changes, norms of transparency, it's all happening!

Doing meta-reanalysis means my coauthors and I are constantly asking for data.

This month we heard back from 21 of 32 author teams on first email, all responses "yes" or "soon." (nice!)

Innovation: asking authors to post data publicly rather than privately with us via email (4 did, more will!)

no no it's not THAT good :)

first prompt was:

best practices according to hadley wickham for starting a brand new r package devtools roxygen etc.

chat really told me: Excellent — that’s exactly what Hadley would do next.

chat's personalized flattery is getting out of hand

we want the video

touché :)

rarely have we needed the "suggestive" results from a "factors associated with" design to have the possibility that X affects Y "suggested" to us

Don't most people? I think it's the submission portal clunkiness to blame not the shirking of responsibility. Only time people have turned me down is when they are not going to be at the conference, so my view is, assign the best discussant you can think of for each panel.

title page of article: There is a skeleton in the social science closet. Almost all of us have heard it rattled at one time or another.! Nevertheless, we collectively ignore it. Some ignore it because they do not think it is very scary: others because its putting to rest would require a major restructuring of our scholarly journals. Perhaps others even fear that admitting its existence would undermine belief in the empirical progress? the social sciences have apparently enjoyed since the widespread diffusion of statistical training and the ready availability of the computer. I will argue that the skeleton, the bias social science journals exhibit for publishing articles reporting statistically significant results, is dangerous

The results of statistical tests should not be submitted to or als until after articles have been accepted for publica- tion.. would base their decisions on theory under discussions of the theory under consideration, the specific hypotheses to be tested, and the data sample to be used.? This would divert attention from the final result to the a priori specification of hypotheses and the appropriateness of data and statistical technique for testing them. Unfortunate-ly, this approach would not work unless adopted by all the relevant journals. If a single journal adopted it, researchers

Any journal that publishes an article with statistical models should be required (by the disciplines?) to provide a page of space to anyone who wants to report the results of applying the authors' models to different sets of data. This approach would provide a less biased sampling of research results. It would also allow us to better gauge the robustness of our theories.8 Some journals now provide some space for veri-fications; doing so should be standard editorial practice.

Researchers should be required to submit a statement with indicating their articles indicating whether or not the model being presented is the one actually first estimated from the data. A general description of statistical techniques would also be included in the submission. Is the presented model the first specification or is it the end product of stepwise regression or some other questionable data search? Where appropriate, the editor would affix a warning along the following lines next to results:

encountered this article by David Weimer from 1986 (cited by 7) with three good ideas for improving science that just a few short decades later, we've started to implement.

Collective Delusion In The Social Sciences: Publishing Incentives For Empirical Abuse

doi.org/10.1111/j.15...

@chloethurston.bsky.social & Mary McGrath (both at @polisciatnu.bsky.social) join the Perspectives on Politics editorial team as Associate Editors in American Politics!