Misc

Assessing computational reproducibility in Behavior Research Methods appears online today.  Behavior Research Methods ( BRM ) is a journal  dedicated to the methodologies, techniques, and tools utilized in psychological research.  We recently examined computational reproducibility in BRM after changes to submission policies. Specifically, a  new policy was introduced for all new submissions on January 1st, 2020, and subsequently made public as part of an editorial: “BRM requires the information to be easily available in a repository or in an appendix” ( Brysbaert et al., 2021, p. 2 ). This project involved a large team that painstakingly sampled a variety of research assets (N=200) before and after those policy changes.  We double-coded what worked and what didn't. We even timed how long it took to get data, code, or stimulus materials up and running.  So what did we find?  The good news is that things are improving. The decay rate is also slower for articles published after cha

For those unfamiliar with academic promotions (e.g., moving from assistant to associate or to full professor) the process remains labor intensive. It frequently involves lengthy documents where a candidate explains why they are worthy of promotion* alongside assessments from line managers, Deans, and senior academics from other institutions. Once all of these documents are amassed, committees discuss what should happen next. These meetings happen a few times a year.  It's all rather stressful.  As an external person, I’m starting to get more reference requests and these tend to occur around the same time of year. Whenever I feel able to provide something useful, I will prioritize these because they are essential to the candidate and without them, the promotion process can drag on even longer.  All one can do is make an assessment of someone's contributions while keeping in mind the institutional criteria. That said, I still feel universities probably place too much emphasis on