A few more things Stapel and Levelt report
The Psychologist published a last rejoinder from the authors of the Levelt Report. Mainly, addressing what has made social psychologists most upset – the notion that this would be peculiar to Social Psychology. And, in this vein, Times Higher education also has an article entitled this is bigger than Social Psychology. Of course it is. Now, as they mention in the levelt letter, this does not leave Social Psychology off the hook, which, I think, most of us are in the clear about. In fact, Brian Nosek is one of the people who will speak at the “moving beyond questionable practices“symposium next week. I’m going. Yay!
Brian Nosek also linked in this the Chronicle article, the Power of Suggestion. It has an interview with Bargh (who has felt particularly under pressure recently), talks with Dijksterhuis, who basically has abandoned the area. (He visited here a couple of years ago. And, some of our students were inspired into looking more at what he does, and got a whiff of the controversy. As bad as the categorical-dimensional in emotion research. Gah). Also, some who have found interesting evidence. Now, I do find the idea of priming – that cues in our surroundings influence and guide, plausible – although at times they kind of cancels out, the way molecule bouncings do NOT make macro-particles like us get bounced around like brownian-motion particles. But, you know, that is a separate question from whether we are doing the research well enough to trust the results.