Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center for the Study of Inequality at Cornell. One of the founding editors of Sociological Science. Do not speak for these organizations.
inequality and mobility, social class, higher education, women in STEM, occupations, and a bit of Alaska.
🚨 Workshop on "Gender and Labor Mismatches" coming up in Santiago, Chile, Dec 6-7 2023.
Open to economists, sociologists, and other social scientists who study causes and consequences of labor market mismatches by gender. A range of topics fall under this broad umbrella.
Deadline to submit abstracts now Sept 10.
Organized by Paola Bordon and Andrea Canales.
(content imported from that other place, sorry for the x-posting)
Please boost. Thx.
More info: https://www.lm2c2.cl/en/conferencias/
Rhetoric: We're excited for the first day of classes, and to be embarking on this journey of discovery and learning together
Reality: Instructor didn't show up for son's first class of the day & year. No emergency, prof just forgot to tell students that today's class cancelled.
Can't think of a good reason for a journal to obtain reviews from 7 different reviewers and then issue a 3rd R&R on a paper. Accept it, reject it: either way, make a decision.
For most papers in social sciences, the pool of true area experts who aren't coauthors or have a CoI is not large. By Round 3 (original + 2 R&Rs), pool is likely tapped out. The editors will have as much, or nearly as much, expertise as reviewers 8 and 9.
Not going to name journal, but it's not sociology.
Recently, the AP, USA today, and other major news outlets posted silly and click-baity articles about the aurora.
In greater scheme of things, this particular bit of misinformation is fairly benign, but the articles illustrate much broader and potentially more consequential problems with low-quality science journalism, scientific illiteracy among consumers, the media business model, and (maybe) AI-generated bullshit.
From @leepetersen :
You may have seen some sensational reporting about the possibility of seeing the aurora in Alaska and other parts of the US last night and tonight. You're probably not going to; here's why.
Well, that didn't take long: just saw my first advertisement from a for-profit edtech company that promises to use "unbiased" AI models to admit a racially diverse class without using information on race.
Pretty soon, we'll have proprietary AI models making admissions decisions based on essays generated by proprietary AI models. What could go wrong?
"I am not angry because the submarine was badly-made. I am angry because I live in a vastly larger pressure vessel being managed and maintained by the exact same people." -- https://cohost.org/hystericempress/post/1731218-reflecting-on-it-th @hystericempress
Posted because I kept seeing this quote posted with the names filed off, so I did a quick google search to find the original so I could share it with full attribution.
I'm getting super-spammed with retoots and faves, so I don't need any more.
Reflecting on it, the reason I think the OceanGate situation has become such a flashpoint for anger is because it's such a perfect microcosm of the problem with everything right now. Decisions are not made based on safety, reasonable caution, or concern for human life. Every decision is instead made from a default assumption of 'what if the bad thing just DIDN'T happen?' We are given pie-in-the-sky promises and sizzle reels and an endless PR hype-cycle for every new innovation and inevitably it fails to work, harms people, and then is maybe barely apologized for before the next bad idea comes down the pike. OceanGate's underengineered, undercooked, doomed submarine isn't merely a metaphor for the hubris of the wealthy, it is a scale model of the way the wealthy dictate our reality. All consequences can be ignored, all blowback can be forestalled, let the end-user eat the cost. I am not angry because the submarine was badly-made. I am angry because I live in a vastly larger pressure vessel being managed and maintained by the exact same people.
Procrastination tool for social scientists: How many of these studies can you identify?
I knew about half. (Sadly, between Kanazawa and Wansink, too many had Cornell connections. Even without Bem's ESP studies on the list.)
Source: Andrew Gelman, in the comments: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/06/21/ted-talking-data-fakers-who-write-books-about-lying-and-rule-breaking-whats-up-with-that/
Peter Catron
Carrie Nash
Resuna