Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #Bropenscience
Most recents (4)
I’m so so so delighted that this piece: #bropenscience is Broken Science is published. I am so proud of it.
Here’s a little thread about how @o_guest and I wrote the article. (Spoiler: what you’re reading is the third complete restructure) 🌺🌸
Here’s a little thread about how @o_guest and I wrote the article. (Spoiler: what you’re reading is the third complete restructure) 🌺🌸
Last year @abrookmanbyrne, deputy editor @psychmag, reached out to @o_guest to ask her if she was interested in writing about the history of the wonderful #bropenscience pun that Olivia had created back in 2017.
Olivia gave it a first pass but writing an article about the genesis of a pun on Twitter felt.... thin. And a bit petty.
It’s something that folks ask for a lot, but it was hard to capture the irreverence of #bropenscience AND the huge power dynamics it draws attention to.
It’s something that folks ask for a lot, but it was hard to capture the irreverence of #bropenscience AND the huge power dynamics it draws attention to.
Cohen suggested that medium effect sizes and larger should be visible to the naked eye. So let's talk about what is visible to the naked eye in the thread that Jenny (yay Jenny!) draws our attention to:
Dani--an award-winning computational cognitive scientist, with a math background so deep she could make us all look silly if she unloaded it, and a history of developing open-science resources well before it was cool--contributed to a paper offering a critique of preregistration.
The lead author, Aba, is a doc student who has co-authored TWO of the big RRR's, published in AMPPS, and helped to coauthor papers promoting other methods developments the OS community has wanted to increase usage of.
Second day of #RepCrises2019 kicking off. First lecture, @derxen on the tone debate.
the lecture is part of the session on normative issues.
Derksen: "I find it very difficult to be normative about the tone debate."
I'm gonna do a small thread on: Why did I coin #bropenscience?
The shortest answer to the question is: because it’s amusing and seems to upset exactly the right people, while also drawing attention to behaviours and ideas that harm #openscience and its adoption in deep ways.
The shortest answer to the question is: because it’s amusing and seems to upset exactly the right people, while also drawing attention to behaviours and ideas that harm #openscience and its adoption in deep ways.
The bro-iest, wannabe macho-est (given context of course — we’re talking about scientists, so macho/bro-ism will manifest in very specific ways) people seem to get upset.
And that’s great, they are the ones that probably need to take a step back and understand that their aggressiveness and even their overrepresentation can push people away.
