Daniel Lakens

@lakens
5.2K Followers
2.3K Following
3.4K Posts

Experimental Psychologist Eindhoven University of Technology in The Netherlands. Chair ERB. I work on making science more reliable and efficient. Likes teaching statistics, bouldering, and walks with my wife and dog. I do not interact with anonymous accounts.

Profile picture: Florian Braakman https://florianbraakman.nl/

Free online statistics textbook:https://lakens.github.io/statistical_inferences/
Publications:https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZbqYyrsAAAAJ&hl=nl
podcasthttps://nulliusinverba.podbean.com/
Githubhttps://github.com/Lakens/
Daniel Lakens19h ago
Caspar van Lissa1d ago

Shape the future of social science as a PhD student of machine learning-informed theory construction, based on patterns in high-frequency longitudinal data! You will be part of vibrant communities like the INSIGHT Lab, Theory Methods Society, and Tilburg Experience Sampling Center

https://tiu.nu/23721

Daniel Lakens22h ago
The problem with scientific organizations is that politically, you want them to be large to have influence, but scientifically, you have nothing in common with many of the members. You have to pick influence or shared scientific values. (I am not a member of any organization).
Daniel Lakens1d ago

"comprehensive study pre-registrations or Registered Reports, which ensure peer reviewing of the study protocol and acceptance in principle before data collection and analysis, are a readily implementable measure that should be considered essential."

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2026.1809421/full

Daniel Lakens3d ago
Statisticians are trained in how to compute statistics, but not why to compute statistics. At least 10% of their training should be in philosophy of statistics. They should also spend 10 credits on their own empirical research project to understand how data is acually collected.
Daniel LakensApr 8
Re-reading Hasok Chang's call for pluralism in Science in his 2012 'Is water H20?'. It is so badly argued for, his discussion is so one-sided, and his rejection to engage with criticisms is so annoying, I find it hard to complete. Will discuss it in an upcoming podcast episode.
Daniel LakensApr 7

Hope to see you at the Conference on Transparency, Technology and AI in Peer Review on June 5, 2026, which is organized in collaboration with the Center for Humans and Technology at Eindhoven University of Technology.

Register at: https://meta-eindhoven.github.io/events/

META/e

Events ## META/e Conference on Transparency, Technology and AI in Peer Review **Eindhoven University of Technology, 5 June 2026** Maximum attendees: 100 **Organizers**: [Vlasta Sikimić](https://vlastasikimic.com/), Cristian Mesquida, [Dvija Mehta](https://www.dvijamehta.com/) Please Register here: [Conference on Transparency, Technology and AI in Peer...

META/e
Daniel LakensApr 6
The first of a 2 part episode on 'Disagreement' in science of our podcast Nullius in Verba is out: https://www.podbean.com/eas/pb-3vw2d-1a8de28 . Why is disagreement and criticism so important in science? Do we need to interact with all our critics? And is criticism, as Popper wrote, how 'our mind grows and transcends itself'?
Episode 78: Dissensio - I

This is a two-part episode on the role of disagreement in science. In the first part, we discuss the "why," before moving on to the "how" in the next episode. Enjoy.    Shownotes Dellsén, F., & Baghramian, M. (2021). Disagreement in science: Introduction to the special issue. Synthese, 198(Suppl 25), 6011-6021. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson. Seidel, M. (2021). Kuhn’s two accounts of rational disagreement in science: an interpretation and critique. Synthese, 198(25), 6023-6051. Shaw, J. (2021). Feyerabend and manufactured disagreement: reflections on expertise, consensus, and science policy. Synthese, 198(25), 6053-6084.  

Daniel LakensApr 1
A new set of papers, sharing the long-awaited result of several reproducibility and replicability projects, including commentaries, is published today. I look forward to reading the studies, and re-using the data generated! https://www.nature.com/collections/idajfifcfg
Reliable research in the social and behavioural and sciences

Sweeping new investigations probe the replication, robustness and reproducibility of results across the behavioural and social sciences.

Nature
Daniel LakensApr 1

A year ago Sajedeh Rasti and I reached out to 20 Dutch metascientists and asked: Instead of competing for this upcoming grant, how about we collaborate, determine priorities, and combine our expertise? Both grants were funded. We discuss our experience in a new preprint.

The preprint is available on Psyarxiv: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/fmnc5_v2

We had not heard of people trying collaborative grant writing like this before. If you have experiences with this format you would like to share, let us know!

OSF

Daniel LakensApr 1
Interesting interview with Anthony Edwards on his experiences working with Ronald Fisher, diving into the topic of Eugenics, with a much more nuanced take than you'll nowadays find on social media. Worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLB5a8op5c
Professor Anthony Edwards on RA Fisher

YouTube