I have been using LaTeX (with pdfTeX) for 20+ years now – to be honest I never bothered to understand the differences between the different TeX engines – here is an excellent article by Graham Douglas explaining the ins and outs of the TeX engine(s).
The replication crisis has many interesting effects on how people (and scientists) think about Psychology (and, of course, other fields) … Here is a nice summary of effects that are hard to replicate.
This syllabus of an (obviously) awesome class has a ton of good reads:
Everything is fucked: The syllabus
by Sanjay Srivastava
I would have two additions:
A multi lab replication project on ego-depletion (Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2016) And the [response](doi: 10.
The illustrated guide from Kindergarten to PhD …
Very interesting article in WIRED on accepting failure and how ignoring it changes the way scientists make progress (or not).
Good theme for new years resolutions …
In the meantime: Happy Holidays!
Joe Henrich published a target article in BBS talking about how economics and psychology base their research on WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) subjects.
Here is the whole abstract:
There is an interesting discussion on how the scientific review process should be handled going on at orgtheory.net blog. The point is that the obvious shortcomings in the current review system (the authors know who the editor is (and vice versa), the reviewer knows (or can easily infer) who the author is …) can be handle through triple blind reviews: authors, reviewers AND editors are included (anonymous upload to a webpage (id through a code), quatruple blind reviews: no one know who the editor of the journal is, quintimple blind: after publication of a paper the authors name is kept secret for some years or, and that’s the actual kicker: sextuple blind: there is no journal name any more – just the paper and the users decide whether it is worth citing or not …