You will obtain far more information than during the initial round of introductions when students (and you) may forget things, and where it’s difficult to take note while listening.
2️⃣ You gain data to refer back to throughout the semester, helping you calibrate depth of your lectures.
1️⃣ Students can share their *actual* level of knowledge anonymously from their peers, they won’t feel judged for not knowing certain theories/methods.
Seminar lecturer here 👋 Quick tip 💁♀️
I recommend sending students a pre-course survey to assess their theoretical and methodological background before the seminar begins.
Two key advantages (see thread) 🧵👇
English translation forthcoming, so stay tuned! 🔜
My review is in English. However, currently the book is available only in Italian. 🇮🇹
Tecnopanico is an empirically grounded reflection on digital media, beyond technopanic and techno-optimism. Drawing on his background in cultural evolution, Prof. Acerbi offers a nuanced perspective that is especially relevant for misinformation researchers, but also digestible for the lay public.
Happy to share that my book review of Prof. @acerbialberto.com "Tecnopanico" is now published in Studies in Communication Sciences @sgkm.bsky.social 🎉
My review is in English. However, currently the book is available only in Italian. 🇮🇹
Tecnopanico is an empirically grounded reflection on digital media, beyond technopanic and techno-optimism. Drawing on his background in cultural evolution, Prof. Acerbi offers a nuanced perspective that is especially relevant for misinformation researchers, but also digestible for the lay public.
Thank you to @nicolebizzotto.bsky.social for this great review (in English!) of Tecnopanico
www.hope.uzh.ch/scoms/articl...
The only relevant mental association in this context: www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbBG...
To help our @ikmz.bsky.social students write their master thesis, we developed a guide with tips and tricks. If you're interested, you can download it here👇
drive.switch.ch/index.php/s/...
Feel free to reuse it or provide feedback!
I need to say this so very, very loudly:
👏 null 👏results 👏 are 👏 not 👏 no 👏 results 👏
👏 null 👏 findings 👏 are 👏 not 👏 unfortunate 👏
👏 null 👏 results 👏 are 👏 not 👏 errors 👏
👏 null 👏 findings 👏 do 👏 not 👏 need 👏 to 👏 be 👏 "fixed 👏 with 👏 "more data" 👏
We really need to sort this, y'all.
lmao some of the #ica26 reviews i’m receiving are straight up copy and pasted from chatgpt how cool what a slay. for example:
The reviews went out from our biggest conference in my field #ica26
Partial (AI) reviews are now a real problem. As a community we need to address this and work on standards.
No one deserves AI slop as reviews.
Happy to be part of this initiative as an Editor, together with @philippesloksnath.bsky.social and other scholars.
Stay tuned: we’re working on new ways to further increase the reach of this valuable tool.
Thanks @shkessler.bsky.social for involving me!
The Media Psychology & Methods Team wishes you a good end to 2025!
The year was special for us: We started as a team, had our first retreat, conferences, teaching, and christmas party (together with the sci comm team).
Off to new adventures!
(But until then: Winter break ❄️☕️🦦)
Congrats Phil 👏
🚨 Now out in Psych Science 🚨
We report an adversarial collaboration (with @donandrewmoore.bsky.social) testing whether overconfidence is genuinely a trait
The paper was led by Jabin Binnendyk & Sophia Li (who is fantastic and on the job market!) Free copy here: journals.sagepub.com/eprint/7JIYS...
Hit 100 citations on Google Scholar today, yay! 🥳
Somewhere out there, a hundred people found my work useful… or at least cite-able. Thank you my friends 🫂
@mepsyme.bsky.social is finally on Bluesky!
Follow us to stay updated on research in media effects, wellbeing, HCI, AI and persuasion, online misinformation, and digital creativity!
Life can now finally continue (only a communication scholar can understand).
Jokes aside - in the following order - keep hydrated, eat your veggies, and peer-review! 💧🥦📝
@icahdq.bsky.social
After a long time in development, {traktok} #rstats is now finally on CRAN!
Whether you have access to the Research API or just want to scrape some pages, traktok has you covered
jbgruber.github.io/traktok/
P.S. Scholars are often proud of students, but is it allowed to be proud of your Professor too? (Tobias take this cum grano salis and treat this post as a once-in-a-while anomaly😜)
@tobiasdienlin.com spoke today at the @ikmz.bsky.social PostDoc Club about his journey to becoming a professor.
My take-home message? Balance is key: be strategic, but don’t overdo it: people notice. And just be yourself (but… not too much and not always 😄).
As you know, I have been deep into the topic of self-sabotage lately, and I could not not think about this paper (we also cited it in our preprint):
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1...
Good news straight from my IG feed:
"When asked to draw a scientist, school-age kids in the United States are increasingly sketching women, according to a study from 2018." (sciencemagazine)
Original article: srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....
Top three reasons given why female scholars are less likely to share their research online:
- Considered less effective
- Less time to do so
- Considered more harmful
Data from Agnes Horvat, n > 3.000.
Transparent and comprehensive statistical reporting is critical for ensuring the credibility, reproducibility, and interpretability of psychological research. This paper offers a structured set of guidelines for reporting statistical analyses in quantitative psychology, emphasizing clarity at both the planning and results stages. Drawing on established recommendations and emerging best practices, we outline key decisions related to hypothesis formulation, sample size justification, preregistration, outlier and missing data handling, statistical model specification, and the interpretation of inferential outcomes. We address considerations across frequentist and Bayesian frameworks and fixed as well as sequential research designs, including guidance on effect size reporting, equivalence testing, and the appropriate treatment of null results. To facilitate implementation of these recommendations, we provide the Transparent Statistical Reporting in Psychology (TSRP) Checklist that researchers can use to systematically evaluate and improve their statistical reporting practices (https://osf.io/t2zpq/). In addition, we provide a curated list of freely available tools, packages, and functions that researchers can use to implement transparent reporting practices in their own analyses to bridge the gap between theory and practice. To illustrate the practical application of these principles, we provide a side-by-side comparison of insufficient versus best-practice reporting using a hypothetical cognitive psychology study. By adopting transparent reporting standards, researchers can improve the robustness of individual studies and facilitate cumulative scientific progress through more reliable meta-analyses and research syntheses.
Our paper on improving statistical reporting in psychology is now online 🎉
As a part of this paper, we also created the Transparent Statistical Reporting in Psychology checklist, which researchers can use to improve their statistical reporting practices
www.nature.com/articles/s44...
