Micheal Sandbank

three men are standing next to each other in a room with the words the wooorst written on the bottom . Alt: three men are standing next to each other in a room with the words the wooorst written on the bottom, a gif from the show Parks and Recreation with the character Jean Ralphio

I think my students are too young to get the reference but I said I'm the worst in class today and then sang it Jean Ralphio style

Journals should pay peer reviewers. That's the post.

Forgot to tag @carltonfong.bsky.social @dryasmiyn.bsky.social

A screenshot of the end of an article titled "Too quant to crit? Advancing QuantCrit methodologies in educational psychology," published in the journal Contemporary Educational Psychology by Carlton Fong and Yasmiyn Irizarry, with a highlighted excerpt which states "Will they be too reliant on triaditional quantitative approaches to critically approach the work ("Too Quant to Crit"), or will they be "too legit to quit" (Hammer, 1991) in the pursuit of building anti-racist bodies of knowledge."

Assigned Fong & Irizarry's "Too quant to crit" paper in my doctoral course on epistemologies of research and I have to say that citing MC Hammer in service of advancing quantcrit in educational psychology is exquisite work. This millennial is in awe.

My career goal as a meta-analyst is to title a paper "Can't See the Forest (Plot) for the trees: ..." and that's really the only professional goal I care about.

I didn't know I needed to see this today

Thanks for sharing this!

If you lead or know of an ongoing or recently completed controlled group study, please get in touch to talk about sharing summary data (note, we don't need or ask for your full dataset, only summary-level data). Contact me at micheal_sandbank@med.unc.edu .

When updating, we always systematically search for studies that have not yet been published. For the first time, we're adding social media to our grey literature search strategy!

Colorful set of concentric circles around the words "Project AIM" in the middle. The logo for project aim.

We are updating Project AIM, the comprehensive meta-analysis of nonpharmacological interventions designed to support young autistic children, to include recently published and completed studies.

Multiple autistic scientists are part of this coalition.

Coalition of Autism Scientists | "autism scientists" share.google/npC7V5Wh84re...

There is a Coalition of Autism Scientists that meets weekly and has done some polling to track this. Are you aware/have you been in touch?

I never bring a laptop or phone to meetings. I write down notes on a notepad and then ignore them for the rest of my life.

Reader, it was because the OSF file was set to private. And that took me ***many*** hours to determine.

Is the garage door open? Are items actually on the lawn? These are the hard-hitting questions you need to be asking.

"My R code now works. I am the smartest person who has ever lived" and Other Tales: A Memoir

The presence/absence of a garage.

"Why doesn't my R code work?" and Other Sad Stories: a Memoir

Educating students and the public about this issue at a time when science is under attack and public trust in science is low can serve to reinforce opinions that science is fraudulent and wasteful. We have to find a way to stop this tidal wave of trash. 6/6

Teaching future clinicians to consume reliable evidence in order to make evidence-based clinical decisions under these conditions is remarkably difficult, especially because in their searches of google scholar, open access publications are typically the first they select to avoid paywalls. 5/

Lately I'm seeing situations where legitimate publishers purchase journals that have a history of predatory publishing. Since 2022, Springer Nature has published Cureus, a journal that has a long history of accusations of predatory publishing/sham peer review. 4/

Beall's list is no longer maintained, and I don't know of any other systematic attempt to maintain an updated list of predatory publishers. There are some known offenders, such as MDPI and Hindawi, but 3/

Certainly I have gut feelings, but "gut feelings" aren't acceptable exclusion criteria. We have always tracked whether articles were published in indexed journals, but lately I'm seeing journals published by known predatory publishers (e.g., MDPI) getting indexed. 2/

This is an issue that I increasingly struggle with as we synthesize evidence for Project AIM. While it might seem easy to reliably identify fraudulent papers published by predatory publishers, I have not yet found clear criteria that reliably distinguish predatory from legitimate papers. 1/

Yes, and I can't write "my gut feelings" as a reason for exclusion, but I'm also seeing previously legitimate publishers venture into publishing questionable journals. For example, the journal "Cureus" which has a history of accusations of predatory publishing is now published by Springer Nature!

I can't read because of the paywall, but just wanted to comment that this is creating a problem for evidence synthesis. It's very hard to identify clear criteria that reliably separates predatory journals and illegitimate research from reliably peer-reviewed work.

It was easier for them to believe that there were minor errors, but the truth was that he cared a lot for precision and he wrote a whole book about measurement.

When I check reliability on our coding, I often remember that my mentor used to report his reliability as .99 even when it was 1 (perfect). Once I asked him why and he told me that reviewers would get suspicious when he reported perfect reliability bc they assumed he was lying.

The Atlantic decided to run theirs early and it aged like milk within hours