james (is still masking) 😷🐈‍⬛'s Avatar

james (is still masking) 😷🐈‍⬛

@lysanderjames.bsky.social

he/they/mx. 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ grad student in social and 🇵🇭 psychology, university of the philippines diliman. metapsych, lgbt research, DEI in higher ed. #renaissancats for cesare and caterina 🐈‍⬛🐈‍⬛ 🐦 @lysanderjames 📸 @poorlycatdraw

470 Followers  |  124 Following  |  31 Posts  |  Joined: 31.05.2023  |  2.1654

Latest posts by lysanderjames.bsky.social on Bluesky

My second presentation at #SPSP2025, where I looked at racialized sexual minority men's experiences of discrimination, and how these experiences are associated with their relationships and mental health outcomes.

Slides 📽️: osf.io/9dhzj
Summary 🧵 [1/12]

22.02.2025 18:48 — 👍 28    🔁 11    💬 1    📌 1

filipino mediterranean fusion 🤯

25.12.2024 17:37 — 👍 2    🔁 0    💬 2    📌 0
Although peer review is one of the central pillars of academic publishing, qualitative researchers’ experiences of this process have been largely overlooked. Existing research and commentary have focused on peer reviewers’ comments on qualitative articles, which are often described as indicative of a quantitative mindset or hostility to nonpositivist qualitative research. We extend this literature by focusing on qualitative researchers’ experiences of methodologically incongruent reviewer and editor comments—comments that are incommensurate with the conceptual foundations of the reviewed research. Qualitative researchers (N = 163) from a range of health and social science disciplines, including psychology, responded to a brief qualitative survey. Most contributors reported that peer reviewers and editors universalized the assumptions and expectations of postpositivist research and reporting. Some also reported that peer reviewers and editors universalized the norms and values particular to specific qualitative approaches. Contributors were concerned that peer reviewers often accept review invitations when they lack relevant methodological expertise and editors often select peer reviewers without such expertise. In response to methodologically incongruent comments, many contributors described a process of initially “pushing back” and explaining why these comments were incongruent with their research. When this educative approach was unsuccessful, some knowingly compromised the methodological integrity of their research and acquiesced to reviewer and editor requests. Earlier career researchers especially highlighted the powerlessness they felt in the peer review process in the context of a “publish or perish” academic climate. We end by outlining contributors’ recommendations for improving the methodological integrity of the peer review of qualitative research.

Although peer review is one of the central pillars of academic publishing, qualitative researchers’ experiences of this process have been largely overlooked. Existing research and commentary have focused on peer reviewers’ comments on qualitative articles, which are often described as indicative of a quantitative mindset or hostility to nonpositivist qualitative research. We extend this literature by focusing on qualitative researchers’ experiences of methodologically incongruent reviewer and editor comments—comments that are incommensurate with the conceptual foundations of the reviewed research. Qualitative researchers (N = 163) from a range of health and social science disciplines, including psychology, responded to a brief qualitative survey. Most contributors reported that peer reviewers and editors universalized the assumptions and expectations of postpositivist research and reporting. Some also reported that peer reviewers and editors universalized the norms and values particular to specific qualitative approaches. Contributors were concerned that peer reviewers often accept review invitations when they lack relevant methodological expertise and editors often select peer reviewers without such expertise. In response to methodologically incongruent comments, many contributors described a process of initially “pushing back” and explaining why these comments were incongruent with their research. When this educative approach was unsuccessful, some knowingly compromised the methodological integrity of their research and acquiesced to reviewer and editor requests. Earlier career researchers especially highlighted the powerlessness they felt in the peer review process in the context of a “publish or perish” academic climate. We end by outlining contributors’ recommendations for improving the methodological integrity of the peer review of qualitative research.

“Where are the findings? You only provide quotes.”

New article considers qualitative researchers’ experiences of methodologically incongruent peer review feedback

Open Access: dx.doi.org/10.1037/qup0...

Few quotes follow 🧵

18.12.2024 23:19 — 👍 156    🔁 56    💬 7    📌 11

are studies pre-registered wicked? or do they have wickedness p-hacked onto them

17.12.2024 04:41 — 👍 29    🔁 6    💬 2    📌 1

this is how my gf got into football during the last world cup. this and the hot men

30.11.2024 23:37 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

i love cycling through physical and mental illness in the span of a month /s

30.11.2024 23:35 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

Thankful for Jonathan bailey

28.11.2024 15:01 — 👍 32    🔁 1    💬 0    📌 0
Dr. Virginia Braun | Quality measures for qualitative research: What really matters and why?
YouTube video by Health Research Institute Dr. Virginia Braun | Quality measures for qualitative research: What really matters and why?

3/5
One was a public lecture on "Quality Measures for Qualitative Research: What really matters and why?" - ideas developed with @vicclarke.bsky.social and elaborated in this paper (www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HId...

28.11.2024 02:30 — 👍 13    🔁 5    💬 1    📌 0

There are many layers here, but I want to comment on one aspect of these findings for now--the editorial board representation. Some will see this and immediately think: we need to get more POC on our boards! I understand that impulse, but encourage you to think a few steps down the game tree 1/n.

27.11.2024 01:55 — 👍 486    🔁 204    💬 22    📌 20
Preview
Non-White scientists appear on fewer editorial boards, spend more time under review, and receive fewer citations | PNAS Disparities continue to pose major challenges in various aspects of science. One such aspect is editorial board composition, which has been shown t...

"Non-White scientists appear on fewer editorial boards, spend more time under review, and receive fewer citations"

www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1...

25.11.2024 23:46 — 👍 656    🔁 297    💬 21    📌 35

i am in queer media and i am holding space for jonathan bailey as fiyero

26.11.2024 18:23 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0
Preview
Why I have resigned from the Royal Society The Royal Society is a venerable institution founded in 1660, whose original members included such eminent men as Christopher Wren, Robert H...

New blogpost:
deevybee.blogspot.com/2024/11/why-...

25.11.2024 07:49 — 👍 2461    🔁 1008    💬 163    📌 201

This is correct, and the linguistic positioning of it as OVER really annoys me; I often make the correction... sadly you don't seem to win friends through this! But then sometimes you get surprised

25.11.2024 07:31 — 👍 33    🔁 8    💬 0    📌 0

PSA: MODERATION LISTS ARE MIGRATING FROM THIS ACCOUNT to @skysentry.bsky.social

If you're subscribed to any of the lists, please re-subscribe to them at the new owner by November 30th, after which I will no longer be maintaining them, and the lists will be removed from this account. Thank you.

23.11.2024 18:06 — 👍 3850    🔁 1920    💬 0    📌 249
24.11.2024 05:32 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

puksaan na

23.11.2024 11:12 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

😬

23.11.2024 06:12 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

😭

23.11.2024 06:10 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

If you’re “queer” but you don’t have any trans friends, in 20-fucking-24, you’re basically straight.

21.11.2024 03:30 — 👍 135    🔁 15    💬 3    📌 0

i was expecting near-borgias era levels of drama and CONCLAVE DELIVERED

20.11.2024 13:19 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

HABEMUS PAPAM (finally saw conclave)

20.11.2024 13:18 — 👍 0    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0
a photo of two black cats. caterina the smaller, long-haired one is inside a cat bowl and looking directly at the camera, while cesare the bigger, short-haired one is sitting beside the cat bowl

a photo of two black cats. caterina the smaller, long-haired one is inside a cat bowl and looking directly at the camera, while cesare the bigger, short-haired one is sitting beside the cat bowl

hello bluesky from caterina (left) and cesare (right) #renaissancats 🐈‍⬛🐈‍⬛

19.11.2024 06:40 — 👍 19    🔁 3    💬 0    📌 0
Preview
A “Gender Critical” and “TERF” Primer for readers trying to make sense of “feminists versus transgender activists” debates

since all the "gender critical"/TERFs are migrating here, thought I'd share this primer explaining their history, dissecting their beliefs, & debunking their talking points. no-paywall links, pls share!
Substack: juliaserano.substack.com/p/a-gender-c...
Medium: juliaserano.medium.com/a-gender-cri...

18.11.2024 19:30 — 👍 3153    🔁 1541    💬 132    📌 82

Israel is one of the most important cornerstones of US imperialism. It needs it to preserve its dwindling hegemony. But this cornerstone is slowly being chipped away at until it is eventually torn down. We will see it fall in our lifetime.

18.11.2024 14:10 — 👍 120    🔁 26    💬 4    📌 1

15 Minutes to Spare? ⏰ Contribute to our project as a translator & be acknowledged as contributor in an e-book! 📖

We're working on transdisciplinary project w aim to gather insights from diverse disciplines & regions, to map & critically evaluate feedback strategies across research cycle 🔄

🧵 👇

18.11.2024 14:16 — 👍 6    🔁 6    💬 1    📌 0

more happy years to come! 🫶🏼

18.11.2024 15:01 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 1    📌 0

What are you least looking forward to about having a bird flu pandemic at the same time as a covid pandemic?

16.11.2024 20:29 — 👍 241    🔁 21    💬 112    📌 9

ok i had done it wrong before! now it’s a moderation list, which is the kind of thing where you can block or mute everyone on it

bsky.app/profile/did:...

16.11.2024 23:30 — 👍 130    🔁 30    💬 21    📌 13

📸

16.11.2024 03:44 — 👍 1    🔁 0    💬 0    📌 0

@lysanderjames is following 19 prominent accounts