New Blog Post now live: psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
A small or even infinitesimal (<1%) level of acts of discrimination can produce substantial experiences of discrimination among targeted groups.
Implications for policy and discourse excerpts to the right. 1/3
Of course, this is only 1200+/- word blog, and this IS Twitter (@NewLiberalsPod has been all over this lately), so I pre-emptively denounce myself for not addressing ALL THE OTHER EVILS IN THE WORLD
Thread III: My Psych Today Blogs debunking histrionic academic rhetoric&claims about race/sex/ethnic bias, stereotypes & prejudice, including but not restricted to stereotype threat, microaggressions&implicit bias.
Just Posted psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
The Discrimination Paradox
This discovery is what began my exposure to how bad political biases in academia really are. The data are overwhelming. psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
Thread II: My Psych Today blogs on political bias and lack of intellectual/political diversity in academia.
This connects directly to Thread I, on the social psych of censorship. psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
Back in the day, I had *some* hope of changing the hyperpartisanship massive political skew and bias in academia. Silly me. psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
THREAD I: My Psych Today Posts Related to the Social Psych of Censorship and Intellectual Intolerance
(this means denunciations, demonization, and attempts to sanction people for their ideas, not just "criticize" them). psychologytoday.com/us/node/115920…
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).
New post just promoted to Essential Read under Replication Crisis at Psych Today***: psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble…
***They either censor/edit my stuff or love it. More love than censorship, so I can't complain too much.
BUT: 1/2
If you click the image, under key points, it says this:
"An experimental manipulation in the study altered many dependent variables, making it unclear if the results are due to mindset differences."
That is NOT me, an editor added it. It is AMUSINGLY wrong.
(need 1 more tw)
2/3
AND I CANNOT REVISE IT. (email to editorial staff is out). A manip that altered many DV's would be good. BUT its wrong. The experimental conditions manipulated a ton of things all at once, making it hard to attribute results to mindset (or anything else).
Read post for details.