Yeah, true love is great and everything, but have you ever found out that your crude way of approximating power is the recommended approach?

I think the best example of concise and informative writing is legitimately the theme song of Clone High.

Shout-out to a co-reviewer on a manuscript who told the authors not to include 95% CIs because they were archaic, but to keep p-values. Congrats on not understanding either and showing that ignorance is contagious. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

This has happened several times this term.

Pre-PhD: I'm not that clever Post-PhD: I have a sophisticated grasp of precisely how stupid I am in multiple fields

"Why did you use threshold X for analysis?" "It was in our pre-registration." Neat. Why was it in your pre-registration?

Great job from the #PSYC4111 class. Your collective writing has massively improved over the course of the semester!

Me [drafting a manuscript]: Hmm. I don't think I need to explain XYZ, it's obvious and the readership will find it condescending. [Six Months Later] R1: Why the hell did you do XYZ?! Me [re-reading the manuscript]: ...That's a great question!

To the authors refusing modest additions to their analyses because they believe they are unnecessary:

Shout out to R2 who caught a copy-paste error that I did not. That would have been an embarrassing erratum...

Watching academics beef with each other is just a joyous experience. Low-stakes outcome + utter contempt + (generally) mild-mannered combatants =

Conversation in #SpeedLab: Student: I programmed an LLM with all of your publicly-available papers, and now I ask it for advice instead of bothering you. Me: ...That's like a child building a robot to give out hugs because their parents are absent.

Excuse me, Microsoft ?!

Professional Advice: If you take a page to explain the metaphor you're using in an academic paper, it's bad science communication.

My absolute rockstar of a PhD student! blogs.unb.ca/graduatestudie…