TL;DR A recent Editorial in the journal Brain has riled up academics. In the article, Prof Masud Husain argues against “bullshit jobs” in academia. Online, people seem to either recognise the content or to take offense to its tone and timing. Because the piece really resonated with me, I aim…
A computational model of avian navigation shows the minimal requirements for inter-generational cumulative improvements to spontaneously emerge.
Many people confuse the terms for sex (“male”, “female”, “intersex”, etc.) and the terms for gender (“man”, “woman”, “non-binary”, etc.), even though sex and gender are different constructs. This sounds like a pedantic point, but it leads to imprecise writing and theorising: Is the nature of your proposed mechanism biological, social, or both?
No.
Tom Hawkins gave a talk at the 1st Dutch Pupillometry Symposium. He presented a computational model of pseudo-neglect as an attentional gradient over the horizontal plane that fades out over time. It managed to capture individual differences in spatial bias, and when and how fast participants’ alertness faded during a task.
This is a quick guide for students who are unsure about how to email at uni. (Or you might have been sent this guide by your prof, in which case this guide is definitely for you too!) Because email isn’t quite like writing a letter, but also not quite like texting, there is considerable confusion about etiquette. Also, many academics have unspoken expectations! The tips in this guide should help you get as quick and as helpful a reply as possible.
Recently, Edwin spoke at the Bristol Neuroscience Showcase. The talk focussed on disgust: how it works, how it doesn’t habituate, and how it can be (somewhat) overcome by using drugs that normalise the rhythm of the stomach. It can now be viewed online.
A new paper claims that APOE ε4 carriers, a group previously described as having poorer long-term memory, actually have better visual working memory. On Twitter, Prof Dorothy Bishop raised the issue of multiple comparisons, or rather a lack thereof… Should the paper be #cancelled?!
We just published an article in Current Psychology on the direct and indirect relations between socioeconomic status and various developmental factors. This post provides a brief summary.
A clash between two major figures in cognitive neuroscience came to a head yesterday, and it got a bit ugly. The dispute centers around a publicly posted peer review of a publicly posted manuscript. Although seemingly aligned with Open Science ideals, the public review prompted worries about ulterior motives and power dynamics in some researchers. In addition to being juicy drama, the events reveal that Open Science requires trust, tact, and integrity. This post summarises the things I’ve learned.
