Not to brag, but they offered me Macallan 25.
11.03.2026 14:23
👍 3
🔁 0
💬 1
📌 0
Not to brag, but they offered me Macallan 25.
Round 2 results of the predicting replicability challenge are released!
Teams improved quite a bit from Round 1. The results provide an appetizer for release of the SCORE program outcomes. And, you can join to participate in Round 3 of the competition.
www.cos.io/blog/predict...
Research output is growing faster than the systems used to evaluate it. The Predicting Replicability Challenge invites teams to use automated approaches to predict whether research findings will hold up when replicated.
Read about Round 2 results and how to participate:
If you would like to see a deeper dive into the results, here is a preprint: bsky.app/profile/meta...
Round 2 results of the predicting replicability challenge are released!
Teams improved quite a bit from Round 1. The results provide an appetizer for release of the SCORE program outcomes. And, you can join to participate in Round 3 of the competition.
www.cos.io/blog/predict...
@plosbiology.org is formalizing its long‑standing practice of asking authors to share research code, introducing a mandatory #code‑sharing policy and clarifying what is meant by code sharing.
Learn more and find guidance on best practice: plos.io/4reyX3v
Each discipline will also show reasonable internal consensus about their placement here as a good thing.
Wonderful remembrance of a wonderful person.
A graphic promoting a book review. On the left is the cover of the book Inside an Academic Scandal: A Story of Fraud and Betrayal by Max H. Bazerman. The cover has large orange and black text and an abstract horizontal paint‑stroke graphic beneath the word “Scandal.” On the right, black text reads: “Jennifer Byrne reviews Inside an Academic Scandal: A Story of Fraud and Betrayal.” At the bottom right is small text that reads “Vol. 46 No. 1 (2026): February,” alongside a small circular logo with the letters “PIR.”
Jennifer Byrne (@jabyrnesci.bsky.social) reviews Max H. Bazerman’s 'Inside an Academic Scandal', a narrative of research misconduct, institutional response, and the ethical challenges surrounding fraud in academia.
journals.uvic.ca/index.php/pi...
My bug and bun are standing up for science today.
I finally gave "Is open science neoliberal?" by @uyguntunc.bsky.social @mntunc.bsky.social and Eper a close read. It made sense of critiques that did not resonate w/ how I understand the reform movement.
Are there rejoinders defending the neoliberal attribution or challenging this description?
If this turns out as described, this is massive news.
www.fastcompany.com/91503415/byd...
Happening March 11! TOP 101: An Overview of the Transparency & Openness Promotion Guidelines
Learn about the TOP framework, which provides recommendations for journals, funders, universities, & researchers on practices that can increase verifiability of research claims.
💻
Register for #SIPS2026 Now!
Join us online and/or in DC for a high-energy, interactive meeting where YOU shape the future of psychological science.
✅ Collaborative hackathons & workshops
✅ Engaging unconferences & roundtables
✅ Inspiring keynotes & lightning talks
Register:
Today Dominic Packer & @jayvanbavel.bsky.social republished @minzlicht.bsky.social's post about "The Downfall of Stereotype Threat" in their widely-read The Power Of Us newsletter. I felt a certain way about that & the evidence presented there & thought I'd respond:
Fun to read this after my post on stereotype threat was republished by @jayvanbavel.bsky.social et al. I don't agree with all that Mary wrote, but it's worth a read. One place I'll push back: if stereotype threat only really affects feelings (and not performance) would it have made the same impact?
I admit being fascinated by the idea of receiving a critique from LLM-Nosek. I doubt it would dislike my drafts as much as I do.
📣 Introducing ManyLabsDACH!
We are delighted to announce our new large-scale crowd-science study spanning Germany (D), Austria (A), and Switzerland (CH). Each participating lab will submit one design proposal, and all participating labs will then jointly select the design to be implemented.
Replication Research (R2), a 🆕 community-led Diamond OA journal, makes replication studies more discoverable, publishable & rigorously evaluated—without subscription barriers or author fees. Ahead of #LoveReplicationsWeek, R2's senior editors shared their vision in our Q&A:
Clicking on both the title and the pdf links worked just fine for me here. They didn't for you?
Thanks for the heads up. I just checked on Google Scholar and found and downloaded several pdfs from OSF. Can you provide some specific examples so that we can share it with the product team? @cos.io @olsonscholcomm.bsky.social
Science sleuths share their common-sense tips for sniffing out fishy articles
go.nature.com/4ceKgVF
As a member of @cos.io effort to build a more resilient ecosystem (see link below if you missed it), we want to draw attention to the call for feedback. Be sure to share your thoughts with us by March 2, ahead of our next planning meeting, using the survey on the post!
www.cos.io/blog/buildin...
GRIOS has established its Academic Advisory Board: 11 leading scholars from 9 countries across Europe, Africa & the Americas, with expertise in #metascience, #reproducibility, #ResearchPolicy & #ScholComm and strong interest in evidence-based #OpenScience policies
🔗 www.grios.org/global-resea...
2025 #EinsteinFoundationAward winners' colloquium w/
+ @simine.com, psychologist @unimelb.edu.au
+ Olavo Amaral, coordinator BRI/@redebrrepro.bsky.social
+ Max Sprang, bioinformatician @unimainz.bsky.social
March 13 at @bihatcharite.bsky.social & online
www.einsteinfoundation.de/en/insights/...
💡 Rather than reinventing the wheel, we're aiming to coordinate and amplify existing efforts, while identifying any gaps to galvanize more action.
Ahead of the committee's in-person meeting in early March, we want to hear from you. Share your thoughts with us through this survey 👇
(3/3)
Join us on Thurs for funder perspectives on open science policy development. Register: cos-io.zoom.us/webinar/regi.... This session explores how funding orgs create, roll out, & manage open science policies that increase transparency in the research they support, aligned with their missions & values
Attention: People in the Charlottesville region. I will be giving the Page Barbour lectures on Tue, Wed, and Thu evening this week in Nau Hall at UVA. Open to the public.
More information: as.virginia.edu/news/qa-how-...
![To: Jeevacation[jeevacation@gmail.com]
From: roger schank
Sent: Mon 1/4/2010 12:53:33 PM
Subject: Re: there is a simpler explanation about women and intelligence
wrong; one; my very best PhD student was female; smartest woman I ever knew;
she has decided to quit being a professor and is now an accupuncturist; that
is the point; no matter how smart, she wanted to be liked or some such crap;
also she failed to be brilliant when I made her leave Yale; she needed a man in
order to be smart; they all do
roger schank
http://www.rogerschank.com/
On Jan 4, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Jeevacation wrote:
> It's the tail of distribution , no really smart women ---none
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 4, 2010, at 7:15 AM, roger schank • t
> wrote:
» intelligence comes about in part from real focus (goal-directed
>> behavior); (this is why you have the absent minded professor
» caricature)
>> it is a rare woman who is not first and foremost focussed on what
>> others are thinking and feeling about her
>>
>> hard to be brilliant if you are worrying if you look fat or why
>> another woman hates you or why you dont own a kelly bag](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:dtgy62tymnpbnzozbpgnov56/bafkreiebtsn4ebmqdnzjdj273ic4y7upjcgdjeqti43xna6qtr2bxe4kxm)
To: Jeevacation[jeevacation@gmail.com] From: roger schank Sent: Mon 1/4/2010 12:53:33 PM Subject: Re: there is a simpler explanation about women and intelligence wrong; one; my very best PhD student was female; smartest woman I ever knew; she has decided to quit being a professor and is now an accupuncturist; that is the point; no matter how smart, she wanted to be liked or some such crap; also she failed to be brilliant when I made her leave Yale; she needed a man in order to be smart; they all do roger schank http://www.rogerschank.com/ On Jan 4, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Jeevacation wrote: > It's the tail of distribution , no really smart women ---none > Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 4, 2010, at 7:15 AM, roger schank • t > wrote: » intelligence comes about in part from real focus (goal-directed >> behavior); (this is why you have the absent minded professor » caricature) >> it is a rare woman who is not first and foremost focussed on what >> others are thinking and feeling about her >> >> hard to be brilliant if you are worrying if you look fat or why >> another woman hates you or why you dont own a kelly bag
Epstein responds in the affirmative, insisting "no really smart women---none." Schank, in turn, admits that his "very best Phd student was female," but laments that she "decided to quit being a professor," adding "that is the point; no matter how smart, she wanted to be liked or some such crap."
An indicator that a reform practice is being taken seriously is that someone goes to the trouble of banning it. Progress!