Psyphilopod

Antisocial psychologists, Bo, Cory, and Lee discuss the peer review process in science--the reasons for it, the problems with it, and whether there is any compelling evidence for bias in peer review beyond their own anecdotal annoyances. And Lee announces the launch of a new journal, Journal of Open Inquiry in Behavioral Science (JOIBS), which will test a new approach to peer review with complete transparency and minimal gatekeeping. Follow Lee: https://twitter.com/PsychRabble Follow Antisocial Psychs: https://twitter.com/AsocialPsychs Learn about JOIBS: https://www.soibs.com/about-5

In the first episode of their Reunion Tour, Bo and Cory debate whether academics are as woke as they seem or whether they pretend to be wokier than reality out of fear for social and professional repercussions. Note: Psyphilopod is rebranding to 'Antisocial Psychologists.' Follow on Twitter @AsocialPsychs.

In this special episode of Psyphilopod, Bo and original co-host Cory Clark are joined by the wonderful Diana Fleischman to discuss the ethics of our treatment of animals. First, they discuss utilitarianism, which is the basic moral framework through which Diana thinks about these issues. Then they get into the weeds of the morality of diets, asking and attempting to answer such questions as: Is it always wrong to eat animals? What’s a suffering footprint? Is hunting more ethical than fast food? How do we know that animals actually experience pain? Fleischman’s article on veganism: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/practical-veganism/ Fleischman’s FAQ: https://dianaverse.com/2020/10/13/practicalveganism/ The moral status of animals: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/ Peter Singer on animal liberation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOlN6d1CP9A Roger Scruton for a different view: https://philosophynow.org/issues/27/Roger_Scruton Follow Diana on Twitter: https://twitter.com/sentientist Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: https://twitter.com/psyphilopod

Building Biden's America: The infrastructure plan, Noem's kerfuffle, and the post-liberal order by Cobo Clargard

Bo and Ben discuss Josh Hawley and post-liberal conservatism. What is post-liberal conservatism? Is it actually post-liberal? Bo and Ben agree that it is largely a high-level philosophical criticism of some liberal principles that is remains within the liberal paradigm. But there is something real at stake in the debate. Bo has more sympathy for Ahmari and others than does Ben, but he agrees that their positive program is at best inchoate. They then discuss Joe Biden’s economic vision, or “Bidenomics.” Does Biden have a coherent economic vision? And if he does, is it one we should want to promote? Bo and Ben agree that there is a kind of vision, that it’s mostly positive, but worry about the size of the stimulus package and think Biden should focus more on infrastructure. Against Frenchism: https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/against-david-french-ism French/Ahmari debate: https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/david-french-sohrab-ahmari-and-the-battle-for-the-future-of-conservatism Hawley and post-liberalism: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/josh-hawley-could-be-the-face-of-the-post-trump-right.html Bidenomics: https://thebulwark.com/the-birth-of-bidenomics/

Bo and Ben discuss Covid hypocrisy in the media. Andrew Cuomo was lionized for months, a champion of the scientifically minded left, a smooth, calming, honest communicator, a hero. Ron DeSantis, on the other hand, was denounced as a cavalier science-denier. But Florida’s numbers are much better than New York’s, and Cuomo has been mired in a scandal about not disclosing deaths from nursing homes. Then they discuss some prominent Republicans: Kristi Noem, Ben Sasse, Tom Cotton, and the aforementioned Ron DeSantis. Who is the frontrunner for 2024? Does Ben Sasse, the most anti-Trump Republican in the Senate, have a chance? Is DeSantis the surprising choice for 2024? Last, they discuss Ezra Klein and Kevin Williamson’s disagreement about the causes of California’s problems. Klein believes that California is superficially progressive, but operationally conservative. Williamson rejects this, seeing California as exactly what one gets with progressivism. Cuomo and media hypocrisy: https://www.foxnews.com/media/mainstream-media-blatant-hypocrisy-ignoring-sexual-harassment-allegations-cuomo Cuomo and Covid: https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/26/cuomos-nursing-home-fiasco-ethical-perils-pandemic-policymaking/ Cuomo and DeSantis: https://www.mycouriertribune.com/commentary-press-swapped-script-on-cuomo-vs-desantis/article_f00f0f24-77ae-11eb-bc06-33c8e3f56cc8.html DeSantis and Covid: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article249521800.html Ezra Klein on California: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/opinion/california-san-francisco-schools.html Kevin Williamson on California: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/ezra-klein-misapprehends-californias-problems/

Bo and Ben discuss the impeachment vote. Although the impeachment failed, seven Republicans, including most surprisingly Burr and Cassidy, voted for conviction. After the vote, Mitch McConnell gave an absolutely withering speech, assailing Trump’s behavior throughout the months after the election, but claimed he voted against conviction because the Senate didn’t have constitutional authority. What was McConnell’s strategy? Was this an impulsive speech from a person appalled at Trump or was it calculated? It’s Mitch, so it must have been calculated! But for what? Does Mitch think he can defeat Trump? Then they discuss the Biden administrations “war on fossil fuels.” Is this a smart look? Or is it a capitulation to environmentalist zealots in the Democratic coalition? Finally, they examine Tom Cotton, the Senator from Arkansas who terrifies progressives, but might be the best hope to unite the conservative coalition. He’s a populist who worked closely with Trump, but he also avoided the excesses of other populists, such as Hawley, and refused to vote against certification. Impeachment vote: https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/15/967878039/7-gop-senators-voted-to-convict-trump-only-1-faces-voters-next-year Mitch McConnell and GOP war: https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/business-a-lobbying/539514-trump-mcconnell-rift-impacts-gop-donors Mitch McConnell’s failed strategy: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/us/trump-mcconnell-republicans.html Biden’s “attack” on fossil fuels: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/27/climate/biden-climate-executive-orders.html Cotton continuing the Trump mission: https://www.wsj.com/articles/sen-tom-cottons-next-mission-carrying-trump-banner-after-trump-11591542001 Cotton horrifies progressives: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/tom-cotton-trump-2-0/

Bo and Ben discuss the issues of the week. Impeachment trial. Some of the prosecutors, especially Jamie Raskin from Maryland, were incredibly effective. However, the Democrats lamentably chose highly partisan members to prosecute, including Swalwell (IA) and Castro (TX), almost provoking Republicans to acquit, like so that they can keep the connection between Trump and the GOP for the 2022 midterm. Still, Bo and Ben agree that, on the merits, Trump deserves to be convicted. The Romney plan. Romney forwarded an intriguing bill, called the Family Security Act that would pay families 350 dollars a month for each child they have up to 15,000 dollars per year. His idea has provoked spirited debate, with most people praising the plan for its boldness and pro-family, pro-fertility aspirations. However, some conservative, including Marco Rubio, have criticized it for potentially disincentivizing work. Bo and Ben both like the plan and think the criticisms are largely overstated. Finally, West Virginia. A state that is a symbol for spatial inequality. Beautiful mountains and rivers, but a slave to the industries of the past. Poor. And hemorrhaging population. How can West Virginia be saved? Answers to this question are difficult but crucial going forward for the United States. Impeachment: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/02/11/us/impeachment-trial Romney plan Vox: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22264520/mitt-romney-checks-parents-4200 Rubio criticism of Biden’s plan: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/bidens-child-care-plan-is-wrong-for-families-and-ignores-the-lessons-of-the-past/ West Virginia: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/08/upshot/west-virginia-manchin-stimulus.html UBI around the world: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/19/21112570/universal-basic-income-ubi-map

Bo and Ben discuss the issues of the week. Biden’s proposed 1.9 trillion- dollar stimulus. Biden is clearly going big, having learned from the Obama stimulus debates. Republicans countered with a much more moderate 618 billion-dollar proposal, but Democrats seem intent on their larger, more generous bill. Bo and Ben largely agree that going big has real political downsides and would like Biden to compromise now and go big later on an infrastructure bill. Biden also signed three more EOs on immigration. These three appear relatively insignificant, but might have larger effects down the road; they are also all part of a clear immigration-friendly agenda, which will almost certainly result in more legal and illegal immigrants. Unsurprisingly, Bo, the resident restrictionist, is not a fan. The performative populists suffered a few setbacks this week. Liz Cheney kept her leadership position by overwhelming vote. And many condemned Marjorie Taylor Greene’s conspiracism. But they remain a force on the Right that will likely not disappear soon. Then Bo and Ben and discuss Avik Roy’s piece in the National Review, “Restoring the Conservative Conscience.” They agree that it lays out a positive, hopeful vision, but is too similar to the Reagan-conservativism that largely failed in the early 2000s. What is needed is a kind of fusionism that is more sympathetic to the concerns of preservationists, contends Bo. Ben and Bo agree that Roy's vision ignores the salient problems of the the day, such as rising inequality and the decline of social capital and civic engagement. Liz Cheney survives: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/liz-cheney-wins-big-matt-gaetz-hardest-hit/ Biden Executive Orders: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/us/politics/biden-immigration-executive-orders-trump.html Larry Summers on the stimulus: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/larry-summers-biden-covid-stimulus/ Avik Roy’s piece: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2021/02/08/restoring-the-conservative-conscience/ Bo’s piece on conservatism: https://quillette.com/2021/01/25/a-return-to-tradition-creating-a-post-trump-conservatism/

Bo and Ben discuss Biden’s early presidency, including his EO lifting Trump’s transgender ban in the military, and his push for a 1.9 trillion-dollar relief package that has a 15-dollar minimum wage tucked inside. They discuss some of the research for and against a higher minimum wage. They end by discussing the filibuster. Should the Democrats end it? What function does it serve? Does it buffer the people from the tyranny of the majority or does it in fact block the will of the people by allowing minorities in the Senate to stifle legislation? CBO on minimum wage: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-07/CBO-55410-MinimumWage2019.pdf Robert VerBruggen on minimum wage: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/the-new-old-minimum-wage-debate/ Ezra Klein on ending the filibuster: https://www.vox.com/21424582/filibuster-joe-biden-2020-senate-democrats-abolish-trump Biden lifts transgender ban: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/us/biden-transgender-ban-military.html

Bo and Ben discuss Biden’s agenda. What can we ascertain about his plan to govern from his first few days and from a flurry of executive orders? During his inaugural speech, Biden spoke of a desire to unify the country, but did any of his rhetoric serve that end? Bo and Ben agree that it did not, and that he failed to offer conservatives much of substance, even verbally. Furthermore, some executive orders were divisive, especially the one on LGBQT+ discrimination, which seems to require high schools and colleges to allow biological men who identify as women to play women’s sports, among other things. His immigration bill, which includes a path of citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants, is also likely to anger conservatives. Much of this is probably for Biden’s base, but it is disconcerting and doesn’t signal an actual desire to meet in the middle. They conclude by discussing Michael Brendan Dougherty’s piece on the future of populism. Will populism survive the wreck of Trump or is it tied to his unique personality traits? Although they disagree about particulars, both Bo and Ben believe, with MBD, that populism isn’t going to disappear now that Trump is gone: too many of the concerns that he gave voice to remain. Michael Brenan Dougherty piece: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/trumpism-after-trump/ Biden’s executive orders: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/us/biden-executive-orders.html Biden’s immigration bill: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/19/us/politics/biden-immigration-policies.html Unity?: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/senate-republicans-throw-cold-water-biden-s-immigration-proposal-n1255232

Bo and Ben discuss impeachment, social media crackdowns, and an essay defending big businesses by Matt Yglesias. They agree that at least in principle Donald Trump should be impeached and convicted. His actions after the election have been repellent, and they should be punished forcefully. They are uncertain about social media curation. Social media presents unique challenges, and easy answers are hard to find. However, they agree that social media has almost certainly degraded discourse and has encouraged a kind of performative politics that is lamentable. Finally, they discuss Matt Yglesias’s piece, “Small business is not the answer,” which argues that we should not confuse bigness with anti-trust violations; and that big businesses are more innovative and better paying than small businesses. It’s easy to have fond nostalgia about small shops and businesses, but they are generally inefficient and bad for workers and customers. Bigness is not bad. A lack of competition is. And creating a more equitable economy does not require attacking big firms; it requires pro-wage policies and a more progressive tax code. Yglesias’s paper: https://www.slowboring.com/p/small-business-is-not-the-answer

Bo and Ben discuss Trump for over two hours. In the wake of the Capitol riot, they reflect upon his influence on politics over the last four years. Is he a symptom of an underlying disease? A cause? Or both? They agree that he confirms the adage that character is destiny and also the hypothesis that character is an important trait to consider when electing a POTUS: His character, manifestly flawed, lead almost inexorably to this moment. Those Republicans who contended that this was a surprise willingly blinded themselves to the dangers he posed. This was not only predictable, but it was also predicted by many observers. The Trump phenomenon, nevertheless, is important to understand because he came to represent the legitimate interests of many aggrieved people. And those people aren’t going away. The important thing is to assimilate them into a more responsible populist movement, a movement with less dependence on wild conspiracy theories and more respect for institutions. Bo and Ben both agree that permanently banning Trump from twitter, although understandable, was wrong and should worry us. They also agree that Biden and Harris’s response to the deplorable riot was disappointing and will likely only stoke the cinders of partisan division in this country. Although there’s not much to be hopeful about right now, it is possible that a responsible figure will emerge, a Marco Rubio or even a Tom Cotton, who channels the frustrations that gave rise to populist in a more praiseworthy direction.

Bo and Ben discuss wokeism, a nearly religious ideology which is ardently held by many of today’s educated elites. Both believe that wokeism is inimical to liberalism because it challenges liberal values such as due process, free speech, and a reverence for liberal civilization. They argue that it likely arose and spread for a variety of reasons, some noble, some cynical, some malevolent. Whatever the cause of its rise, Bo and Ben both agree that it is here to stay, at least for the short term. They end by discussing its consequences, and its likely trajectory. David French on the great white civil war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjMGq4uzCIc Bo and Ben Winegard on the Great Awokening: https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/ Rob Henderson on luxury beliefs: https://nypost.com/2019/08/17/luxury-beliefs-are-the-latest-status-symbol-for-rich-americans/

In a comeback for Psyphilopod, Bo and Ben Winegard, MZ Twins, take the helm and discuss evolutionary psychology, intelligence, and polices. They start with natural and sexual selection. Then they talk about modularity. Modules are domain specific processing systems that evolved to solve recurrent evolutionary challenges. However, not all features of the human mind/brain are modular. Intelligence seems domain general. (Perhaps it is domain specific to novelty!) Politics are caused and constrained by human nature. Humans are implacably competitive, so any political ideology that minimizes competition is probably a bad ideology. In the modern West, society seems to be pulling apart based on certain traits such as intelligence and self-control. Those higher in IQ and self-control (and more educated) are largely thriving. Those lower are not. And these two groups, which we can, following David Goodhart, call "somewheres" and "anywheres" are creating two more and more disparate cultures and competing against each other for limited resources and cultural status. Populism can be viewed as a response to the cultural ascendancy of the anywheres. Charles Murray's "Coming Apart": https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/119020/coming-apart-by-charles-murray/ Leda Cosmides and John Tooby's "Evolutionary psychology primer": https://www.cep.ucsb.edu/primer.html David Geary's "Origin of Mind": https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4318015 Bo Winegard's: "Conservatism: An Intellectual Defense": https://arcdigital.media/conservatism-an-intellectual-defense-db37af1879e7 David Goodhart's "Road to Somewhere": https://www.hurstpublishers.com/book/the-road-to-somewhere/

Episode 18: Bo and Cory discuss whether the field of Social Psychology, on whole, has been positive or negative for the world. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

What is the significance of implicit bias in the lab and in the real world? And why are social scientists, the public, and the media so fascinated with unconscious bias? These questions and more on Psyphilopod Episode 17 with guest-host, Dr. Calvin Lai. Follow Calvin on Twitter: @CalvinKLai Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 16: Our guest-host, Diego Reinero, chats with Bo and Cory about the relationship between the ideological slant of research and replicability, and whether scientists can and should eliminate moral concerns from their research. Read Diego's meta-analysis: https://psyarxiv.com/6k3j5/ Follow Diego on Twitter: @diegoareinero Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 15: Our guest-host, Gregg Caruso, chats with Bo and Cory about free will skepticism, the nature of retribution, and whether society would be better off without moral blame. Follow Gregg on Twitter: @GreggDCaruso Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187

Psyphilopod Episode 14: Our first ever guest-host, Azim Shariff, chats with Bo and Cory about responsible communication of science, coping with scientific reality, and whether Bo should broaden his ingroup to all of humanity. Follow Azim on Twitter: @azimshariff Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 13: Dr. Cory Clark and Dr. Bo Winegard discuss whether scientists should not pursue certain topics for ethical reasons. Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod

Psyphilopod Episode 12: Dr. Bo Winegard and Dr. Cory Clark discuss the extent to which scientific conclusions should influence policy, whether the conclusions drawn by progressive social scientists are influenced by fear of policy reper-cussions, and whether they are right to worry. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187

Psyphilopod Episode 11: Dr. Bo Winegard and Dr. Cory Clark discuss the complicated relationship between truth, science, and activism. Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod

Psyphilopod Episode 10: Dr. Bo Winegard and Dr. Cory Clark discuss the controversial online journal, Quillette, and whether it fulfills its stated purpose as a platform for free thought or whether it has become an echo chamber for those opposed to progressives and the social justice movement. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 9: Dr. Bo Winegard and Dr. Cory Clark discuss whether some people are blank slatists, selective blank slatists, or whether such accusations are a straw man. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 8: Dr. Bo Winegard and Dr. Cory Clark discuss evolutionary psychology and why some other branches of psychology aren't fans. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Social Psychologists and Evolutionary Psychology (Buss & von Hippel) papers: https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2018-57934-001.pdf https://labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/files/2013/02/von-Hippel-and-Buss-2017.pdf

Psyphilopod Episode 7: Bo and Cory discuss why pursuit of truth can lead to skepticism about science and whether liberal bias is a problem for science. And Bo mansplains himpathy to Cory. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Is the Political Slant of Psychology Research Related to Scientific Replicability? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330935931_Is_the_Political_Slant_of_Psychology_Research_Related_to_Scientific_Replicability

Psyphilopod Episode 6: Bo and Cory discuss the evolution of punishment, viral outrage, and why you're probably a sadist. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Signaling theory of punishment: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature16981 Viral outrage can be counterproductive: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618780658 Why social media incites moral outrage: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/538ca3ade4b090f9ef331978/t/5a53c0d49140b7212c35b20e/1515438295247/Crockett_2017_NHB_Outrage.pdf

Psyphilopod Episode 5: Bo and Cory discuss sex differences, the politics of sex differences, and Bo's beta male anti-masculinity bias. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Status competition paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-018-0147-7 Geary's male/female book: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-08926-000 Equalitarianism paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325033477_Equalitarianism_A_Source_of_Liberal_Bias Kteily paper: https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2019/01/08/1818545116.full.pdf

Psyphilopod Episode 4: Bo and Cory discuss civil discourse, the demand problem for intellectual humility, and why nobody has an issue with UFO free speech. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Intellectual humility paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167217697695?casa_token=-RB7fd8H99kAAAAA%3Ag8z2N4TbUm1mDqafG0SotW64mutz2v_u4TkhaIRcB74xC0Z3b--Hu-dAyPgbtgx3MOpTUu6DqSGP-w Openmind app: https://openmindplatform.org

Psyphilopod Episode 3: Bo and Cory discuss your lack of free will, whether we should preserve moral responsibility regardless, and why Jeffrey Dahmer was morally superior to Ted Bundy. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Free to punish paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261066203_Free_to_Punish_A_Motivated_Account_of_Free_Will_Belief Making punishment palatable paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315795680_Making_punishment_palatable_Belief_in_free_will_alleviates_punitive_distress Forget the folk paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319944911_Forget_the_Folk_Moral_Responsibility_Preservation_Motives_and_Other_Conditions_for_Compatibilism Free will and politics: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319579669_Political_Differences_in_Free_Will_Belief_are_Driven_by_Differences_in_Moralization Free will and addiction: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312517366_Ordinary_people_associate_addiction_with_loss_of_free_will

Psyphilopod Episode 2: Bo and Cory discuss moral philosophy and why buying yourself an expensive suit might be more moral than donating to charity. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory

Psyphilopod Episode 1: Bo and Cory discuss political bias and why it is so hard to measure, potential bias in social psychology, LeBron James, and witches. Follow Psyphilopod on Twitter: @Psyphilopod Follow Cory on Twitter: @ImHardcory Follow Bo on Twitter: @EPoe187 The Jost et al. article about conservative cognition is available here: http://www.sulloway.org/PoliticalConservatism(2003).pdf Bo, Cory, Connor, and Roy's "Equalitarianism" manuscript is available here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325033477_Equalitarianism_A_Source_of_Liberal_Bias Here is an article that talks about liberal/conservative bias and the current political leanings in social psychology: http://yoelinbar.net/papers/political_diversity.pdf And here is the Ditto et al meta-analysis: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316164633_At_Least_Bias_Is_Bipartisan_A_Meta-Analytic_Comparison_of_Partisan_Bias_in_Liberals_and_Conservatives The critique from Baron and Jost: https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~baron/papers/dittoresp.pdf And the response from Ditto et al: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328916374_Partisan_Bias_and_Its_Discontents