Hans IJzerman asked me to write for the ‘News’ section at In-Mind. Specifically, I’ll be evaluating the quality of news items related to the fraud cases in social psychology.

Here‘s a first ‘headline’  on why Dave Nussbaum’s  post on the Smeesters case deserves more attention.

Here‘s a second headline on the Smeesters case, describing that 5, not 3, papers contain suspicous data patterns.

Here‘s on that describes two problems with the Stanford Prison Experiment: (1) the experiment was pre-tested (2) the guards were told what to do. Repost at Psychology Today.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s