Show newer

RT @DocWan
Mon cerveau est en miette, je ne comprends pas comment je peux entendre les 2 aussi clairement alors que les mots sont si différents 🤯
(via @KittyFeeley sur TikTok)

@Hirstrj @lakens @chelseaparlett @arcaldwell49 @guyprochilo @FrederikAust the concept of the smallest detectable effect size given a sample size is my favourite. That’s what’s making the meaning of (statistical) power really hit home with my students.

«Les taux de rentabilité sont de l’ordre de 40%. Ils profitent à fond de la politique publique»

Les CFA véreux rhabillent Elsevier, Springer-Nature et autres Wiley pour l’hiver avec de telles rentabilités 🙃

Show thread

«Certaines écoles font du surbooking, explique aussi la directrice générale de l’Anaf, Morgane Daboval. Une fois lié par le contrat, le jeune ne peut plus se rétracter et doit payer les frais exorbitants. C’est légal mais inacceptable.»

Oh oh oh, wait for it!

« Pas pour la conseillère d’Emmanuel Macron, qui aurait rétorqué que «les étudiants sont armés pour lire des contrats». »

🤡🤡🤡

Show thread

[#VeilleESR #Apprentissage]
« Libération révèle comment depuis quatre ans ces milliards d’euros d’argent public viennent surtout engraisser les fonds d’investissement qui achètent les organismes de formation. L’apprentissage est un filon qui rapporte très gros. »

Voilà du supérieur qui ramène du flouz ! 🤷‍♂️😔

liberation.fr/societe/educatio

The #Clarivate list of Highly Cited #Researchers turns out to be a happy hunting ground for identifying dodgy individuals involved in #Papermills and other dubious activities. forbetterscience.com/2022/11/2

As a bonus, this is an European meeting, which makes it possible to travel by train instead of plane (8/7)

Show thread

So we may add a 4th rule for next year's meeting: a short crash course in audiology the week before so that everybody can follow the talks. (7/7)

Show thread

Yet, I realized that most of the questions were asked by senior researchers. I discussed this with two PhD students from my group who told me that they don't feel comfortable asking questions about topics they may not be familiar with. (6/7)

Show thread

4 - Of course the last one is an implicit rule arising from
the fact that ARCHES is a small "private" conference (only members of the organizing teams can attend). (5/7)

Show thread

3 - friendly atmosphere and respectful scientific interactions so that junior attendees don't feel afraid to present their work or to ask question. (4/7)

Show thread

2 - senior members do not present their own work but an overview of the work of their research team members; (3/7)

Show thread

1 - minimal registration fees, we don't need fancy dinners or luxurious venues; (2/7)

Show thread

I have just returned from ARCHES, a small European conference in audiology. The organizing comittee (which my team is part of) follows a set of self-imposed ruled which I think should be a model for other international scientific meetings: (1/7)

@kinozhao @philosophy @academicchatter

FWIW, I'm not a professor but as a recent undergrad, I can confirm previous research saying notes don't help study anyway, self-testing does. So withholding them won't help them make better notes.

Additionally, if you're withholding slides but then examining their understanding of the content using specific, definable criteria for what is correct/incorrect, then you better be very explicit about what you're actually teaching in your lectures.

what if we all agreed to use each other's target stimuli as fillers in syntax experiments
#linguistics #psycholinguistics #experimentalLinguistics

A new paper building on Wong et al (2022) again shows that the misuse of Bayes factors is prevalent, and as far as I can see *massively* higher than the misuse of frequentist p-values: psyarxiv.com/du3fc/. Really appreciate these proponents of Bayes factors taking such a critical look at how Bayes factors are used. I think Bayes factors will soon join p-rep and 'the new statistics' as a failed alternative to p-values. 1/2

Should grants use a lottery approach? 🎟️

"Research shows that, barring a minority of outstanding projects, grant winners and losers are not decided by a precise and objective identification of worthy and unworthy projects. Instead, the luck of the draw — who reviews what proposal and the opinions they hold — generally determines these outcomes."

"It is excessively wasteful in terms of researchers’ time."

statnews.com/2022/10/21/resear

#sciencereform #macademia #metascience @academicchatter

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.