Shall we "follow the science"? A short thread of sources on Things That Do Not Work* to Increase Social Justice:
Trigger Warnings
Diversity Trainings
Implicit Bias Trainings.
*=Tests of their effectiveness fail to show any.
1/n
Trigger Warnings Do Not Work.
and likely cause more harm than they prevent (which is not hard, because they prevent hardly any harm).
Mandatory Implicit Bias Trainings are so bad that even one of the country's foremost advocates of the concept of implicit bias says "Don't do this." psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
Bonus: Empirical tests of Prejudice Reduction Techniques, Writ Large:
Produce effects shrinking to near 0 effects when tested w/large samples
Are rarely tested in the real world (as opposed to lab)
Rarely test actual behaviors.
To be clear, I generally think "people hating other people for no good reason" is bad and trying to get people to stop hating each other if they have no good reason is a worthwhile endeavor.
That's a big "if" especially if we include "people think they have good reasons." As communicated in the images shown here.
END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In honor of this stupidity, I thread here an incomplete list of the White administrators and faculty at elite U's that have been forced out for: 1. Ethics violations 2. No ethics violation at all.
🧵
Its worth remembering that, whether or not they "defended" firings, they denied that "cancel culture" was a thing and *justified* punishing targets & *implemented* firings, suspensions & retracting papers) with variations of "look how evil that person is."
🧵w/receipts.
First, the firings. When possible, I purposely chose some of the most obvious glorification of the firings. Like here: theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
David Shor, fired for Tweeting a peer reviewed sociology article showing that peaceful protests are more effective than violent ones at persuading people. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
Dear Aidan,
Please explain how this ad is NOT in violation of U.S. and Washington DC (where APA, the society sponsoring this journal, is housed) laws prohibiting discrimination based on race.
🧵 ending in END.
The ad, shown in full above, includes:
"In service of APA's commitment to EDI... APA Publishing's fellowship program seeks to elevate leadership opportunities for ECP's (early career psychologists) from communities that have been historically underrepresented..." It explains:
"Such individuals include, but are not limited to, psychologists who are Black, Indigenous, or other people of color and ethnicities..."
Introducing the new Journal of Open Inquiry in the Behavioral Sciences. And we mean "new" not just "another." 1/2
Spread the word to those who pub behavioral sciences.
@lakens @CJFerguson1111 @MattGrossmann @JukkaSavo @JonHaidt @peterboghossian @a_m_mastroianni, @RickCarlsson @CHSommers @chrisdc77 @profyancey @ImHardcory @yorl @minzlicht @MarcusCrede @sociologyWV @primalpoly @SteveStuWill
Also, @HSJSpeaks, @lastpositivist, @Docstockk, @olivertraldi (note to philosophers: We currently have a paper under review by Holly Lawford-Smith). Journal practices inspired by @jon_rauch. @StuartJRitchie (see top tws⬆️).
THREAD
Academia continues to embarass itself. Paper retracted for absurd concocted reason (way worse than "technicality"). wsj.com/articles/medic…
1/n
From the WSJ article:
"While the respondents consented to the publication of the survey’s results, Springer insists they didn’t specifically agree to publication in a scholarly or peer-reviewed journal. That’s a strange and retrospective requirement" 2/n
How this works now -- see @JukkaSavo's thread and paper:
Unequal Treatment Under the Flaw,
on why retractions are no longer for fraud, they are in response to activists who identify flaws that are never used to retract papers that don't piss off activists.
@AndrewJ73405114@HonestNauman@Komi_Frey@Stanford If anyone is "looking for" ways to be concerned, they sure don't need to look very hard. Reply 🧵
1/n.
The initiative clearly is at Stanford & whole pt of "initiative" is to persuade others to adopt, well, what shall we call this?
@AndrewJ73405114@HonestNauman@Komi_Frey@Stanford Steelman: "New norms for inclusive language."
Alternative view: "Language policing."
Why? Because of widespread *enforcement* of these "new norms" through punishments.