@tassilotissot.bsky.social
30.01.2026 12:16
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
@tassilotissot.bsky.social
We are currently collecting data from ~25 countries and are still seeking collaborators to either collect data or donate data collections in other countries, in exchange for becoming co-authors on the project. #PsychSciSky #SocialPsyc #Fatigue #Morality
In this project, we will test whether effort moralization (moralizing effort in behaviors) is influenced by cognitive fatigue.
This is derived from motivational theories, showing that fatigue increases effort perceptions for our own tasks. Potentially, this extends to the tasks of other as well...
Happy to share our (almost) new Stage 1 Registered Report at @pci-regreports.bsky.social with @tassilotissot.bsky.social and many bluesky-less collaborators from the @jresearcherprog.bsky.social, testing the effect of fatigue on effort moralization in multiple countries.
osf.io/exgm6/files/...
After 5 years of data collection, our WARN-D machine learning competition to forecast depression onset is now LIVE! We hope many of you will participate—we have incredibly rich data.
If you share a single thing of my lab this year, please make it this competition.
eiko-fried.com/warn-d-machi...
Giving what we can has implemented a fun game where you spin a globe to see how your starting point in life would compare if you were reborn today, randomly somewhere on earth.
www.givingwhatwecan.org/birth-lottery
New paper in press at JPSP! An adversarial collaboration focusing on a large-scale test of how strongly implicit racial attitudes predict discriminatory behavior. Pre-print here: osf.io/preprints/ps...
Very interesting and I think it would be so important to have more of this! Yet, I think especially for ECRs who are often measured by number of papers, the incentives are also not appropriately designed to keep up already published work, or am I overlooking something?
#motivation #PsycSci #PsychSciSky
This work was done at the Motivation Psychology group at the University of Vienna with Prof. Veronika Job, Dr. Christopher Mlynski, Chantal Titz, and Dominik Meindl. mot-psy.univie.ac.at
We hope to extend this work in the future to better understand the dose-response relationship between cognitive fatigue and task persistence.
Differences in persistence and performance by experimental group (fatigue high or low). Further, a plot of engagement over time by participants, showing that many persisted, but participants from the hgih fatigue group disengaged earlier.
Indeed, when being allowed to leave, fatigued individuals disengaged earlier than the control group and performed worse on the task (up to 1h of Stroop task: 2,400 trials).
Further, based on the psychobiological model of endurance, we assume that the effect of fatigue would be motivational, leading to task disengagement. This means that we don't believe they get worse, but don't want to engage. Hence, we allowed participants to leave the main task whenever they wanted.
We asked participants in the experimental group to engage in 1 hour of adaptive, cognitive tasks. This means that the task's difficulty adjusts to your ability and gets harder if you perform better. The lucky control group watched a nature documentary in the mean time.
Consequently, there seems to be a disconnect between psychological data and everyday experiences. In our experiment (N = 321), we tested how cognitive fatigue might bridge this gap. Yet, most prior research used tasks, which are not long or hard enough for participants to be really fatigued.
🎉new paper out in Motivation Science🎉
Why are we eating fries when ego-depletion is wrong🍟?
While there is little evidence that ego-depletion (inhibited self-control after brief demands) is a robust effect, many have experienced troubles with their goals when being tired...
At ZPID we are searching for a tenure track assistant professor for Psychological Metascience in joint appointment with @unitrier.bsky.social preferably someone who has conducted quantitative research in metascience in psychology or related disciplines. Questions? Feel free to contact me personally.
Do you maybe have someone who would like to give a talk about this for our department to explain the core ideas behind this?
We built the openESM database:
▶️60 openly available experience sampling datasets (16K+ participants, 740K+ obs.) in one place
▶️Harmonized (meta-)data, fully open-source software
▶️Filter & search all data, simply download via R/Python
Find out more:
🌐 openesmdata.org
📝 doi.org/10.31234/osf...
Would you argue to then mandate PreReg for all studies? Solving p-hacking and harking sounds like two pretty solid wins already, I guess.
Looks very interesting. Are there very different standards what a pre-reg has to contain, compared to psychology? The cited durations for completing a pre-reg seem very long to me, but maybe they are much more specific?
Oh how great! I will check it out next week:) thanks for all the week and the update here.
PCI Psychology is open for submissions! Did you know that you can easily submit your recommended preprint to 20+ PCI Psych friendly journals? See all friendly journals here: psych.peercommunityin.org/about/pci_fr...
#PsychSciSky #SciPub
If this is successful, is there a plan to do this more often:)?
There is much enthusiasm, in principle, for adversarial collaborations (ACs), a scientific conflict resolution technique that encourages investigators with clashing models to collaborate in designing studies that test competing predictions. Adversarial collaborations offer the promise of breaking deadlocked debates, resolving disputes, and providing a deeper, more comprehensive understanding of a research domain. In practice, however, adversarial collaborations are more the exception than the rule, and there is almost no evidence on how scholars who have ventured into ACs assess the experience. To understand these perspectives, we surveyed and interviewed 29 scholars who participated in 13 AC projects. The data revealed that interpersonal conflicts were generally minor, that these projects required more upfront effort than typical collaborations, but benefited from high-quality results and more thoughtful post-publication debates. Rather than producing a clear “winner,” the most common outcome was a deeper understanding of the problem space through the integration of opposing perspectives. Although the generalizability of these findings is limited by a sample consisting only of scholars who completed an AC, they nonetheless highlight the value of ACs as a tool for advancing scientific inquiry and offer practical guidance for scholars and journals exploring this approach.
29 scholars reflect on their participation in adversarial collaborations:
“Rather than producing a clear 'winner,' the most common outcome was a deeper understanding of the problem space through the integration of opposing perspectives”
Open Access: doi.org/10.1007/s111...
#MetaSci #Methodology 🧪
No worries, still sounds like a very nice initiative! I will spread it with some people I know might be interested.
Ah ok. I thought PCI was on „vacation“ now, so we submitted before the portal closes in July. Yes, it’s one of the projects where students otherwise beg friends/family to fill the study, so funding would definitely be nice😬
Maybe I missed it in the description. Can people apply who already submitted a snapshot for a given project?
Ah ok, I thought this was specifically aimed at early career researchers.
Sure thing, but „necessary“ is no objective measure here. There is usually a fine line between increasing efficiency and saving it into the ground, like the massive reduction of overheads in the US currently. So cost-saving is also an easily weaponizable construct.
