Number of ‘unsafe’ publications by psychologist Hans Eysenck could be ‘high and far reaching’ Hans Eysenck A “high and far reaching” number of papers and books by Hans Eysenck could be “unsafe,” according to an updated statement from King’s College London, where the psychologist was a profe…

Diederik Stapel was a massive watershed moment in psychology.

However, he was -- and let's be slightly glib here -- some guy from The Netherlands who wrote social psychology papers.

The full accounting of the Eysenck case is approx, at minimum, TWO STAPELS.

retractionwatch.com/2025/12/03/n...

"In 2019 we notified journals about serious integrity concerns in 172 clinical trials. Over five years later, only 22 have been retracted. The 135 unretracted trials have 1989 citations in systematic reviews, clinical guidelines, and consensus statements"

[paraphrased]
www.bmj.com/content/390/...

Social scientists should not use chat interfaces when using LLMs in their research: they are impressively inefficient, and obscure/impose important methodological decisions that require thought.

THREAD🧵

I think that is also one of the hardest realizations for students, the point where it becomes clear that large parts of the literature don't serve any higher purpose. They just keep literatures and careers alive.

5-panel comic. (1) [teacher with long hair next to whiteboard] TEACHER: I’m supposed to give you the tools to do good science. (2) [teacher addressing students] But what *are* those tools? Methodology is hard and there are so many ways to get incorrect results. What is the magic ingredient that makes for good science? (3) TEACHER: To figure it out, I ran a regression with all the factors people say are important: [embedded list in sub-panel, cut off at end] Outcome variable: correct scientific results. Predictors: collaboration; skepticism of others’ claims; questioning your own beliefs; trying to falsify hypotheses; checking citations; statistical rigor; blinded analysis; financial disclosure; open data (4) TEACHER: The regression says two ingredients are the most crucial: 1) genuine curiosity about the answer to a question, and 2) ammonium hydroxide. (5) STUDENT: Wait, why did *ammonia* score so high? How did it even get on the list? LONG HAIR: ...And now you’re doing good science!

Good Science

xkcd.com/3101/

In extremely rare move, Harvard revokes tenure and cuts ties with star business professor An internal investigation had found that Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino’s research on why people lie and cheat was based on falsified data.

Harvard university’s top governing board, the Harvard Corporation, decided this month to revoke Francesca Gino’s tenure and end her employment at Harvard Business School www.wgbh.org/news/educati...

New post: I was curious about the consensus statement on social media effect and wondered how the sausage gets made.
rubenarslan.github.io/posts/2025-0...

New systematic review and meta‐analysis looks at

-harm reporting
-risk of bias
-action mechanism specification
-incremental therapeutic effect size

in psilocybin-for-depression RCT literature. I'll briefly summarize below. 🧵

🧪 #psychscisky #episky #medsky #psychiatry

That is just *gold*, deserves to be my first repost on here!

I asked DeepSeek to develop a scale to measure addiction to addiction scale development and of course it delivered.