A lot of us like being a cop more than we like other bits of science. Same vibe as new atheism and sceptics groups of the 00s. The identification of rationality with narrow, punitive, know-all, correctness.
Many are now conditioned to only pay attention to potential QRPs, cheating, fraud. If there's no reason to suspect those, it's all good. We're suddenly operating in the realm of facts. Science doesn't dabble in method or knowledge anymore, but in procedures and checklists. No need to read or think.
One of the original reviewers of the paper said, on Twitter, that he didn't take our original concerns very seriously. That is, he didn't think it mattered that the study had a design that could not produce the conclusions of the paper. The conclusions, after all, had to be right!
"Simply stating the tautological mantras quoted earlier with references to the gurus in the field is not a suitable, sufficient, or satisfactory statement that compels any reader of your work to accept that you have carefully thought through what you want to do, and why it is the best way to go."
I first point my students to this: Chamberlain, K. (2012). Do you really need a methodology? QMiP Bulletin, 13, 59-63. www.academia.edu/2022411/Cham...
Chamberlain, K. (2012). Do you really need a methodology? QMiP Bulletin, 13, 59-63.
Shadows of Doubt *officially* released into V1 yesterday. An incredibly strange feeling to think it's "done" after years of hard work from a tiny, dedicated team, including @monomoon.bsky.socialwww.pcgamer.com/games/sim/sh...
Clue in.
In case you missed it, you can submit your full paper, extended abstract, or workshop proposal to #DiGRA2025digraconference2025.org
The Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA) conference is an international academic conference dedicated to the study of digital games and related phenomena. DiGRA is a global organization that pro...
In my view, study design (along with theory) is *the* ultimate preregistration. It always tells the story as it is. We just need some counterfactual thinking. Why is the study designed this way? Is this an appropriate design if this is the desired inference? Is this a good test of the theory?
Extremely expensive ($150) and released with zero publicity? Yes. Available from less reputable providers? Also yes.
Late, but great news! In 2020 I got 日本デジタルゲーム産業史, a book on the history of Japan's game industry. A pain for me to read, but nice to have a Japanese perspective, highlighting the impact of games like Puzzle & Dragons (which Westerners often overlook) So...an English translation came out in 2023 lol
