What a surprise! @evabuechel and I are super excited to share that our paper “Mysterious Consumption: Preference for Horizontal (vs. Vertical) Uncertainty and the Role of Surprise” is the Editor’s Choice article in the current issue of @JCRNEWS! 1/8 https://t.co/ytl7OOdVDN
A couple of thoughts to reviewers if you want to be helpful to the AE (particularly if it's me).
1. Be less negative (even if you say reject). If we took the average reviewer's advice, 99% of papers would go directly into an incinerator against a backdrop of evil laughter.
1/4
@tweetsbymidge I honestly think each episode of @99piorg is worth listening to. This one I listened to recently is super interesting: https://t.co/n3Yffa49n7
Two weeks ago, I announced a video series providing a conceptual introduction to linear regression for first-year psych PhD students. I recently released two sequels, featuring practical demonstrations in R and thorough practice interpreting interactions.
#Statistics#RStats
here are the tasks I was given by an esteemed scholar to move forward revising my book. I think they'll be incredibly helpful to any academic writer out there. 🧵
1. Re-read the entire draft, highlighting in a favorite color your major claims.
#AcademicTwitter@AcademicChatter
I really agree with this point of view. I think some of the disagreement comes from feeling like "Why should the reviewers who rejected me get to tell me what to do, especially when other reviewers will tell me something else."
A brief thread...
Important thread and advice for junior faculty and PhD students 👇 thanks @Shilpa_Madan.
Academia is hard y'all. Ask and offer support, and be kind to yourself and others.
@elliotlund@evabuechel Hahaha having a mystery option for the paint would be super cool 😎 probably would work better if you show them the possible options they could get 😉
Terrific and important (and surprising!) paper on Mysterious Consumption (that is, people buying products without knowing what they are buying). By @evabuechel and Ruoou Li.
https://t.co/iHLKRqta2i