Eric was told to ask some "genuine social scientists." His reply not only "rings true," I have seen it. They are so enmeshed in a leftist/activist bubble that conservatives, centrists, libertarians and even mere skeptics scare the bejeesus out of them:
@RhiannonDauster@MGalvanPsych Nah. Just a social psychologists who knows where the skeletons are hidden and who has the skillsets to check under the hood to see how the sausage, whoops, I mean "consensus" is made.
@RhiannonDauster@MGalvanPsych The Sordid History of "Consensus" in Social Psychology
A Thread 1/n ending in END
A Priori: When IS social science credible?
This is when:
@RhiannonDauster@MGalvanPsych Notice the absence of "Majority Vote." Scientific facts/truths are not established by "consensus."
Claims that "X should be believed because consensus" are social conformity moves, and should be a HUGE red flag that maybe "They do not have the evidence."
@RhiannonDauster@MGalvanPsych "The evidence is overwhelming."
While on the topic of cherrypicking, shall we look at some of the other evidence?
17 experiments, nationally representative samples.
No bias.
This is why I believe in "implicit bias" (just not the form advanced by most academics). Psychologists SAY the right things. Then keep citing studies that violate several of these standards. Thread with examples. 1/n ending in END.
All Citation Counts are from Google Scholar, 2016 and later -- i.e., AFTER the Replication Crisis and Methodological Reforms.
Reminder: Typical articles are hardly cited. An article cited>100 is influential; >1000 VERY influential.
Stereotype Threat, Steele & Aronson 1995.
Citations: 4770
Low Power
Methods, data not publicly available
No representative samples.
Effect sizes not reported
Not preregistered
Thread: Mostly Accessible Sources* Critical of "Implicit Bias" and "Implicit Bias Trainings"
*Serious scientific and science reporting sources. Not talking your libertarian uncle who runs a car dealership. 1/n Ending in END.
Reupping this blog for the evening crowd.
Before @jessesingal wrote this article, attempts to scientifically criticize implicit bias or the implicit association test were demonized, derogated, and dismissed. This opened the floodgates. thecut.com/2017/01/psycho…
Jesse is a science news reporter, so that is written in a manner that most people can understand. So is this: qz.com/1144504/the-wo…
Referring to implicit bias trainings: "The results are underwhelming"
When Bret Stephens, a NYT Opinion writer, expresses more sense and insight on prejudice than I have seen throughout all of Academia: A thread of quotes from: nytimes.com/2021/05/24/opi…
"In recent years it has become an article of faith on the progressive left that anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism and that it’s slander to assume that someone who hates Israel also hates Jews.
Not everyone got the memo."
"Not the people who, waving Palestinian flags and chanting “Death to Jews,” according to a witness, assaulted Jewish diners at a Los Angeles sushi restaurant. Not the people who threw fireworks in New York’s diamond district."
Jews are victimized by hate crimes at a far higher rate (given their population) than all other groups, including Blacks&Asians. FBI data shown. 1/n ending in END.