ianhussey.mmmdata.io - Profile | ThreadSky | a Reddit-style client for Bluesky

@ianhussey.mmmdata.io is expressing optimism about improving research.

submitted 2 days ago • 1 comment

God above, there's more www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

submitted 40 days ago • 1 comment

My guide on GRIM and GRIMMER will be added to COSIG soon. Very cool set of open resources, take a look or get involved!

submitted 4 days ago • 0 comments

Anyone can do post-publication peer review. Anyone can be a steward of the scientific literature. Anyone can do forensic metascience. Anyone can sleuth. That's why we are launching COSIG: the Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides, an open source resource for all of the above. cosig.net

submitted 4 days ago • 4 comments

I am beyond stoked to announce COSIG, the Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides! Have you always wanted to do post-publication peer review/forensic metascience/sleuthing? Start here! cosig.net

submitted 4 days ago • 1 comment

never watched static on the tv i’m saving it for a low point in my life

submitted 5 days ago • 8 comments

Science-integrity project will root out bad medical papers ‘and tell everyone’ Thrilled to announce this new $900,000 project headed by @jamesheathers.bsky.social

submitted 4 days ago • 4 comments

@jamesheathers.bsky.social has won $900k in philanthropic funding to establish The Medical Evidence Project, which will find flawed medical research that costs lives. www.nature.com/articles/d41...

submitted 4 days ago • 0 comments

The following article has been retracted on the basis of my @pubpeer.com comments. Zemestani & Mozaffari (2020) “Acceptance and commitment therapy for the treatment of depression in persons with physical disability: a randomized controlled trial” journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

submitted 5 days ago • 0 comments

The original sin of many scholars is treating methods as a mere nuisance rather than an integral part of the scientific process.

submitted 8 days ago • 3 comments

Francesca Gino: "I am deeply sad and disappointed that the University has concluded as it has. But now that this process is over, I am free to show why its conclusion is so clearly wrong. I will continue the fight and do everything in my power to right this wrong." www.linkedin.com/posts/france...

submitted 10 days ago • 2 comments

@shuhbillskee.bsky.social, Niklas Johannes & I finally submitted our critique of a "new paradigm" in social media effects research for peer-review at Meta-Psychology. If you're interested in reviewing, please submit a review to [email protected] or e.g. prereview.org, or reply here.

submitted 11 days ago • 3 comments

We thank Reviewer 2 for their helpful feedback which has greatly improved the paper

submitted 10 days ago • 3 comments

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...

submitted 14 days ago • 5 comments

The work of NGS, says Tim Burch, the executive director of the National Society of Professional Surveyors, “is kind of like oxygen. You don’t know you need it until it’s not there."

submitted 13 days ago • 8 comments

Scientists like to blame poorly communicated results on science journalists. This case shows the double standard: 1. When I exaggerate, it's a joke. When you do, it's 'misinformation'. 2. JvB's own tweets about the project didn't explain the methods, highlighted preliminary vibe check results.

submitted 13 days ago • 2 comments

The copyright statement of Elsevier now includes AI training.

submitted 14 days ago • 2 comments

It's all so farcical. Nobody could seriously believe that there's some plan here which goes step 1: cancel all foreign student visas at Harvard, step 2: ?????, step 3: increase replication rates in biology. The lie is so transparent as to be insulting.

submitted 14 days ago • 31 comments

🧵An example of the shenanigans and junk science accepted in medical journals. In September 2023, JAMA Pediatrics published a ludicrously bad paper (quasi-retracted after much effort) claiming long COVID is "strikingly rare" in kids, supposedly vs the WHO definition. jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...

submitted 162 days ago • 18 comments

A common sentiment is “I can’t share my code because it’s messy and there might be errors” But if it’s that untrustworthy, why are you publishing the results it generates?

submitted 30 days ago • 4 comments

Not sure where to start with this one. Internet gaming addiction… is a risk factor for internet gaming disorder

submitted 16 days ago • 5 comments

breaking the cycle of abuse is when i thank the reviewers for their insightful suggestions

submitted 19 days ago • 2 comments

New article by @cathleenogrady.bsky.social on the social media 'consensus' characterises the preprint as a failure of science communication — because many got the impression the consensus was much stronger than it is. www.science.org/content/arti...

submitted 17 days ago • 5 comments

and even if they had a Data Sharing Statement, only 12 responded to query and were willing to share

submitted 17 days ago • 1 comment

Please, for the love of science in infant cognition, make videos of your stimuli available (even if you do live puppet shows). I'm trying to read through a paper right now, and there is no way someone could replicate it in good faith because there are no videos and so few details.

submitted 18 days ago • 5 comments

"It seems reasonable to suppose that any characteristic arising in Large Language Models is likely to be partly rooted within language” Incredible insights happening at PNAS

submitted 18 days ago • 3 comments

Save the date for the 8th Perspectives on Scientific Error conference on 11, 12, and 13 Februari 2026 in Leiden, the Netherlands. perspectivesonscientificerror2026.wordpress.com This is an event not to miss, bringing together philosophers, statisticians, and metascientists.

submitted 18 days ago • 1 comment

My internal test for whether LLM papers like this are interesting is as follows: if you explicate the second premise, is it still interesting? Premise 1: Humans can do X. [hidden premise 2: LLMs are training on a corpus of human language] Research question: can LLMs also do X?

submitted 18 days ago • 1 comment

Almost 15 years of replication crisis in psychology we get this high profile paper on social media and mental health research... Like Bem and PSI, studying of how this paper - and its popular framing - saw the light of day, will teach us a lot about how psychologists evaluate evidence quality.

submitted 20 days ago • 5 comments

Very bored of seeing papers like this

submitted 18 days ago • 1 comment

"Consider replicated experimental field studies. These are very effortful studies, done either at considerable expense or making use of widely reported policy changes. You certainly wouldn’t expect a researcher to say such studies exist in their field of expertise when they don’t."

submitted 19 days ago • 1 comment

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...

submitted 19 days ago • 1 comment

We’re back to the “hundreds of psychological studies cannot all be wrong, educate yourself”-stage of discourse. I recommend that onlookers to this discourse pick some of the cited studies & see how compelling they find them, wrt causal identification & strength of statistical evidence.>

submitted 20 days ago • 9 comments

Great example of people asking “did this study even occur?”

submitted 21 days ago • 0 comments

typical corrupt science

submitted 22 days ago • 165 comments

A massive health dataset has spawned a wealth of cookie-cutter "research Mad Libs" papers that don't tell us anything useful, but flood the literature with noise. Possibly AI-generated, possibly paper mill origin. www.science.org/content/arti...

submitted 24 days ago • 2 comments