Aidan Wright

I had similar thought to you here. I share your concerns. bsky.app/profile/aida...

From vibe coding to vibe science? I think we want to avoid entering the era of vibe science.

At least in general, I think many areas of psychology have been doing vibe science all along.

Good grief no. These people are incorrigible. It’s a waste of time.

Lot of that here. We don't ever even meet as just the faculty. Every other group in the department has special dedicated meetings. Not us though.

It really hampers our scheming.

You know why

Yeah, it’s DAGs overlayed with ML. What a fucking nightmare.

a cartoon of a man with a smoke ring around his head says @john.melo on the bottom ALT: a cartoon of a man with a smoke ring around his head says @john.melo on the bottom

Cool is one word for it. :-)

a woman says it 's the same propaganda in front of a window ALT: a woman says it 's the same propaganda in front of a window

A colleague asked me today about "causal discovery analysis" - never heard of it. Sounded fishy. Looked it up, and it is rotten fish all the way down. The Directed acyclic graph folks are at it again with their irresponsible naming of this technique. Flashbacks to 2017 and "network" propaganda.

I get it. I’ve long said I have a very parenthetical cognitive style. Eg I always use the verbal equivalent when I talk. But I’m also terrible at punctuation (and anything with the formalities of writing really). So the way AI uses em dashes really has been revelatory.

AI has taught me that em dashes are a really useful writing tool! Don’t know how I lived without them.

I'm totally with you, just adding an asterisk

Yeah. That and sometimes you just can't assign a paper to a content expert when considering all the other issues involved (e.g., individual AE burden, breadth of content covered)

No re-review is good ideal, worth shooting for, really hard to be absolute in practice

This is the policy at the journal I edit. Or, rather, #2 is strongly encouraged, but doesn't always work because of legit expertise gaps and need for input from experts.

I have…adopted a different strategy from yinz. I lift whatever portion of my body weight is left over from lying down with my feet as the fulcrum (you might know this as a push-up), I do that quite a few times, and am closing in on 175lbs from the other direction at 6’2”

a close up of a woman 's face with a purple shirt on . ALT: a close up of a woman 's face with a purple shirt on .

ooh, I know this one!

Talk about not getting the assignment

I keep thinking, that for many areas of research, in the era of GenAI the data have become relatively more valuable than analysis, interpretation, and dissemination.

Saying the same thing on two social media platforms is like telling the same story to two groups of friends.

I think introductions should end at 300 words.

It was a long-winded explanation. This distinction will help me improve the process of explaining this moving forward so I have a better mentoring product. Thanks!

5/5

I validated their frustration—we’ve all been there—and then proceeded to explain that the doing of this taught them a great deal that would serve them for years. In other words, the process was valuable even if it didn’t matter for the product.

4/5

One reason I really like it is it cites me. With that out of the way, I can say I also really like this pithy semi-alliterated heuristic. Probably because I already use it in my own work and mentoring of trainees. I mean the heuristic, not the catchy alliterated part. I’ll use that now too.

3/5

One reason I really like it is it cites me. With that out of the way, I can say I also really like this pithy semi-alliterated heuristic. Probably because I already use it in my own work and mentoring of trainees. I mean the heuristic, not the catchy alliterated part. I’ll use that now too.

2/5

This is a very useful post, in my opinion! I enjoyed the process of reading it, and the product of that will be me referencing it frequently in conversations and having it inform my thinking.

Let me explain why I like it...

1/5

I saw that! I commented on substack, but I will copy that and post it here. too.

Same, though I find no value in the process.

*genAI not gene, though I think gene might be a nice unthreatening sounding name for an AI model

As I see it, using gene (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude) can really help one be more efficient at work (e.g., reducing time for coding, getting abstracts down to 150 words, helping with better lit searches), but trainees need to learn how to do some things without AI assistance. So, competing interests.

Clinical psychology depends on scientific evidence, but research from @chopwood.bsky.social et al. suggests that the kinds of data most commonly produced may not always align with what clinicians find most useful in practice. Read the article in American Psychologist: doi.org/10.1037/amp0...

Hey Claude, give me a hypothetical music show lineup that is the most 90’s possible