I think we need to establish ethical standards of conduct where we are required to report this type of behavior and incompetence from editors and PIs.

At some point, incompetence is indistinguishable from misconduct.

Save the date! The 7th Perspectives on Scientific Error conference will take place on February 5-7, 2025 at Universität Bern, Switzerland. If you're interested in errors, fraud, negligence, or hype in science, please join us! This is what we have planned:
errorsin.science

Excited about this event at Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm on April 26 (in person):
Research Assessment for Transparency and Reproducibility - event with John Ioannidis
news.ki.se/calendar/resea…

P-hacking can be time consuming and tedious. Proud to open source this efficient base R routine.

- Runs in < 500 nanoseconds (per microbenchmark)
- Easily parallelizable
- Output preserves monotonicity and linear scalability in its defined domain

Interested in replication research? Consider writing a commentary for the next special issue in Meta-Psychology, which will publish critiques of the article 'Replication value as a function of citation impact and sample size'! (full call text in image)

I want to know everyone's experiences publishing in:
* MDPI journals
* Hindawi journals
* Frontiers journals

Not stories about what you heard, please, but your literal experience. what happened to you. Editors of said journals particularly welcome.

RT this. A lot.

Protocol paper for INSPECT-SR now published. Developing a tool to detect problematic RCTs: bmjopen.bmj.com/content/14/3/e…

The protocol for 'Strategy instruction for improving short- and long-term writing performance on secondary and upper-secondary students: A systematic review' is now published!
#systematicreview #education #writing #strategyinstruction

The Campbell Collaboration
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl…

In his keynote at the Perspectives on Scientific Error workshop, Ian Hussey finally answers the question who can help us carry the burden of detecting all the countless scientific errors out there:
A clone-army of Nïck Brown🌻-s

Beklämmande att se en professor vilseleda allmänheten om sin forskning på det här viset.

Korrelation är inte liktydigt med kausalitet. Studien påvisar inte 'positiva effekter av att åka Vasaloppet' utan att deltagarna skiljer sig från kontrollpersonerna.

svt.se/nyheter/inrike…

Proud to have been (a tiny) part of this important study. The Norwegian foundation Dam: 'The results are truly shocking. ... Tens of thousands of patients have been exposed to potentially harmful treatments, without us learning anything from it.'

in my regression class today: the anatomy of a regression model

A comparison of vanZwet et al. (Gelman, Goodman) and Schimmack and Bartos's studies of clinical trials in medicine using abstracts and Cochrane reviews.
replicationindex.com/2024/01/03/a-c…

Really shocked to see that editor of American Psychological Association journal American Psychologist calls replications and null findings 'invalid.' 😮 Our field has long undervalued replications and null findings. Surprised to see it put so bluntly. Brian Nosek (@[email protected])

I am writing about when and how to deviate from a preregistration (building on my 2019 paper linking preregistration to the severity of a test). If anyone has papers I might have missed on how often people deviate, and why, (beyond Claesen, 2019 and Den Akker, 2023), let me know!

Gino: '.... auditing only my papers actively ignores a deeper reflection for the field,” she wrote. “Why is it that the focus of these efforts is solely on me?”'

Frankly, she's got a point.

chronicle.com/article/scient…

📢 New working paper alert! With the help of more than 700 volunteer reviewers, we (Miloš Fišar, Christoph Huber, Elena Katok, Ali Ozkes and myself) assessed the reproducibility of ~500 articles published in the journal Management Science. Some results. 📊🔍 #Reproducibility

It would be a pretty smart move if science funders created grants exclusively dedicated to the maintenance of open source software and tools.

Andrew Gelman responds to an email pointing out a possible mistake in the influential Gelman and Loken paper on measurement error and the replication crisis. Good reminder that all simulation based articles should publish the underlying code. statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/10/29/sim…

🚨🚨🚨Shameless little bullies alert 🚨🚨🚨

Without my prior permission, a cell of self appointed data police have unfairly scrutinised my seminal work, in an unfair and bullying fashion. They claim to have found an 'error'.