Reading this gem of a paper and I think I'm in love? Linking theory to stats, research questions, explicit target populations, causal inference.> osf.io/preprints/soca… I'm just a bit sad it wasn't published in a psych journal because it is super relevant for our field. Gonna cite it in every single peer-review I write anyway.>

Just finished “Quantum”, supposedly a “super-collider” of a book. I got a weakness for science history books & physics stuff that I can still to some extent understand, so this was a very interesting read.> The events of this book unfold in front of a remarkable historical background, scientists being drafted for WWI, WWII driving a wedge between Germans & the rest of the sci community, & researchers being accused of communism during the Cold War.>

So this is the 2nd study on ego-depletion that claims to be preregistered, and once again, I’m skeptical:

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @daveschester view original on Twitter

In this case, only one study—only the survey part, not the experimental studies—were preregistered. In a previous case, see this blog post for details: bayesianspectacles.org/two-pitfalls-o…

So over the course of the last years, I've developed a certain knee-jerk reaction where I'm super cautious about p-values between (~).01 and .05.> I've been working with a few large-scale data sets and one thing I've experienced is that effects that are robust and are likely to pop up in other data sets as well come with much lower p-values.>