BIAS Lab director studying prejudice, discrimination, dehumanization, speciesism, intergroup contact, generalized prejudice. Confirmed Boffin. #PrejudiceResearch #WhyWeLoveAndExploitAnimals (does not online-bicker).
Gordon Hodson is a psychology professor at Brock University, where he directs the Brock Lab of Intergroup Processes. He is known for his research on political ideology and its relationship to prejudice, intelligence, and climate change denial. .. more
Comment by Gordon Hodson (@gordonhodsonphd.bsky.social)
Web: go.nature.com/4jfAzXo
PDF: rdcu.be/ef9y5
✳️ systematic biases (e.g., racism, sexism)
✳️ poor construct validity
✳️ undermine standards and learning
We should evaluate teaching as seriously as we do research. Or don't do teaching evaluations.
Multifactor authentication seriously acting up right before I go to class to lecture....
.... is a small price to pay to keep the universe safe.
Less jokingly:
Understanding regression to mean is pretty much my coping strategy for life in 2025.
The variability in this meta-analysis is consistent with our lab finding (bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...):
Generalized essentialism correlates much more with anti-Black racism than with anti-schizophrenic or anti-gay prejudices.
It seems integral to anti-Black
Well, there's evidence that AI prefers AI-generated material... so if they're using AI to screen or evaluate papers, you could be onto something (even if said in jest).
Lord help us. I don't know why we're willingly doing this to ourselves. Particularly when science is under attack.
Men have long been expert at dodging domestic labour during big family events.
"Babe, you know me, I've just GOT to watch my game".
Reposted by José Pina-Sánchez
publicera.kb.se/ejels/articl...
Not read yet, but this paper looks of interest to people in my orbit.
Questioning the practice of throwing every covariate under the sun into your models. Here, in a legal context, which is interesting.
Reposted by Gordon Hodson
publicera.kb.se/ejels/articl...
Maybe we should flip everything? Give ECRs most speaking time & more established researchers the 5-min slots.
(I can already anticipate, however, that field mandrakes wouldn't do it)
We want to hear from as many voices as possible. (and bring in enough $$$ to make conference viable).
But is THIS the way? Is it working for us? Are we watering things down so much that we're not achieving our inclusivity & pedagogical goals?
Is it just me, or do you consider it a bit outrageous to ask PhD students (or others) to travel to a conference, often out of state/province/country, to present for 5 mins?
Also: Does this practice align with our #ClimateCrisis concerns?
Reposted by Gordon Hodson, Efrén O. Pérez, Matt N Williams
/1
This is anti-social behavior. It is making life harder for everyone involved except for the person submitting the slop
#PrejudiceResearch scholars will want to check this out
journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...
(btw, I'm not suggesting that validity is the same as whether something is falsifiable. Instead I am wondering whether we can call a research finding valid if it's not falsifiable).
That is consistent with what I hear from qualitative researchers.
But is being non-falsifiable essentially cool with qualitative researchers?
(I guess I'm asking: what is "validity" if findings are not falsifiable?)
Truly not looking to fight on this; trying to get my head around it
Please don't bite my head off. Genuine question 👇
I've recently been told by several researchers that because their methods are qualitative, their ideas aren’t falsifiable.
And they're ok w that
This is a head-scratcher to me
Is this really the stance of the qualitative field?
AMPPS is a journal with clear value to the field. I always scour the table of contents.
Many newish journals, if we're honest, we didn't need. We need AMPPS.
You must test mediation
You must use implicit measures.
There was a stretch, for a while, where in #SocialPsychology you essentially HAD to test mediation to get into the "top" journals.
You know, like how you had to include an implicit measure too!
Reposted by Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Hodson, Ian Campbell , and 18 more Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Hodson, Ian Campbell, Charles West, Dustin Mulvaney, Christian E. Weller, Juan Cole, Cathy N. Davidson, Alan Richardson, Silvia Secchi, Philip Cowley, Roopika Risam, Jacob T. Levy, Mary L. Dudziak, Brian Keegan, David Murakami Wood, Mark Rice, Seth Masket, Meredith Farkas, Manisha Sinha, Stella M. Rouse
In part bc I know a group of men who get together one weekend each year for a drunken outing.
They call the event SLOP (Stupid Losers on Patrol).
Seems fitting for how we're destroying knowledge & creativity with new tech.
Reposted by Efrén O. Pérez
Toni Morrison: "The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work."
Good lord, Britain.
Might you want to, ummm, do something to save your educational institutions?
If you think that's expensive, contemplate the costs of:
✳️ rebooting these at a later date
✳️ a less educated public
#FundEducation
www.theguardian.com/education/20...
Education is something the UK used to excel at. Have a strong global reputation.
You'd think government would want to keep that ship afloat at all costs
Reputations are hard earned, easily lost
Good lord, Britain.
Might you want to, ummm, do something to save your educational institutions?
If you think that's expensive, contemplate the costs of:
✳️ rebooting these at a later date
✳️ a less educated public
#FundEducation
www.theguardian.com/education/20...