Michael C. Frank Profile picture
Developmental psychologist at Stanford studying language, babies, pragmatics, cognition, learning. Open science advocate. Bluegrass picker, slow runner, dad.
Sep 24, 2018 12 tweets 7 min read
What is "the open science movement"? It's a set of beliefs, research practices, results, and policies that are organized around the central roles of transparency and verifiability in scientific practice. An introductory thread. /1 The core of this movement is the idea of "nullius in verba" - take no one's word for it. The distinguishing feature of science on this account is the ability to verify claims. Science is independent of the scientist and subject to skeptical inquiry. /2

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mertonian….
Aug 6, 2018 7 tweets 2 min read
A thought on grad advising. When I was a second year, an announcement went out to our dept. with the abstract for a talk I was giving in the area talk series. A senior faculty member wrote back with a scathing critique (cc'd to my advisor, @LanguageMIT). /1 The part that made the biggest impression on me: they said that the first line of my abstract was *so embarrassing that they thought my graduate training had failed*! Actual quote: "You look naive at best, many other things at worst." And on from there. /2
Jul 2, 2018 19 tweets 6 min read
Prosocial development throwdown at #icis18: presentations by Audun Dahl, Felix Warneken, and @JKileyHamlin. Three opinions on a fascinating topic! [livetweet thread] Dahl up first. Puzzles of prosociality: there’s an amazing ability to help others prosocially from an early age, but some infants don’t! Why? Behaviors emerge via 1) social interest and 2) socialization.
Jun 22, 2018 9 tweets 5 min read
Everyone makes mistakes during data analysis. Literally everyone. The question is not what errors you make, it's what systems you put into place to prevent them from happening. Here are mine. [a thread because I'm sad to miss #SIPS2018]

A big wakeup call for me was an errror I made in this paper: langcog.stanford.edu/papers/FSMJ-de…. Figure 1 is just obviously wrong in a way that I or my co-authors or the reviewers should have spotted. Yet we all missed it completely. Here's the erratum.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111…