#Psychscience

Michael McCarthy

When the journal “Psychological Science” publishes pseudoscience, and then “vigorously defends the editorial process to which the [pseudoscience] in question was subjected,” it validates claims that psychology is not a

Terrible response. What a debacle. I need a drink to rethink my life choices. Taken at face value (which I am skeptical of doing), it seems damning for journal peer

Dr. Aneeta Rattan

Imagine having so many layers of privilege that not one of these 6 people had the issue of racism pop to mind on an IQ paper? I hope editors and

Andrew Devendorf

AndrewDevendorf

#psychtwitter #clinicalpsychtwitterHave you ever heard of "me-search?" If so, my guess is that its described as selfish or biased.But these attitudes are unwarranted, and me-search can actually be positive for

effortfuleduktr

Love them or hate them, multiple-choice questions are an unavoidable aspect of education.I've recently created a poster (see below) and written three articles explaining strategies for improving upon how students

[1] I changed my graduate teaching last year to encourage my students to think more about replication and it's already had a positive impact on our research.I figured I would

Important panel w @drbufka this morning: “Realizing @ABCTNOW’s mission in a politicized world.” Been thinking about it all day and wanted to share some of the points I’m taking with

Flavio_Azevedo_

In light of C&W retraction scholars are wondering how pseudoscientific & racist works got published in Psych's top journals. This APS tweet consider that "Further Reflections" would be a solution