eupolicy.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
This Mastodon server is a friendly and respectful discussion space for people working in areas related to EU policy. When you request to create an account, please tell us something about you.

Server stats:

240
active users

#credibility

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

Bangers. Bangers and mash with a side of pure bangers:

"[European election-related] content from low-credibility accounts had 1.7 times more engagement on Instagram, 7.6 times more on Facebook, and 2.4 times more views on YouTube per 1,000 followers compared to that from high-credibility accounts." [1]

"in 2018, [...] more than 70% of content views on the platform were the result of an algorithmic recommendation. We see no reason why that proportion would have dropped since then." [1]

This violates "fairness, freedom of expression and freedom of information. Given finite amounts of user attention, artificially elevating low-credibility accounts comes at the expense of all other accounts on the platform, including high-credibility ones." [1]

[1] science.feedback.org/an-unfair

recommended follow 👉 @sciencefeedback for more high-quality, high-credibility, reality-based and cited work like that!

Causalingofication - describing an association as if it is causal, without a research design allowing for causal inference.
detectingbadscience.wordpress.
Correlation is not causation. Yet research reports often make causal claims, even when the research design does not allow for them. Researchers regularly describe the results of a regression as if the correlates have “effects” on the outcome.
#badscience #betterscience #causality #causalinference #credibility #experiment #regression

Detecting Bad Science · CausalingoficationDescribing an association as if it is causal, without a research design allowing for causal inference. A common problem in research reports is the use of causal claims when the research design does…
Replied in thread
Continued thread

“The #credibility of the court is on the line, & they risk looking very #partisan, depending on not just what they do but how they do it,” Waldman said.

“What made the Court’s 1974 ruling in the #Nixon …case so profound was not its reasoning, but the fact that it was an 8-0 repudiation of Nixon by a Chief Justice he had appointed. I certainly hope that the Court finds a way to present a united front in whatever it decides in #Trump’s case. But…I’m not optimistic,” Vladeck wrote.

Continued thread

There were few #witnesses whose testimony was central to the #crimes charged. One was #MichaelCohen, whose #credibility was attacked by #Trump's lawyer Todd #Blanche.

Another witness —who had no connection to the falsification of business records— was #StormyDaniels, whose #HushMoney from Cohen is what was covered up. Susan Necheles, the defense lawyer w/the most trial experience on Trump's team, worked aggressively to sow doubts about Daniels’s story w/the jury.

Continued thread

#Necheles is trying to make #StormyDaniels look like a liar. But many of her questions have to do w/money & Daniels is making it clear that she is not wealthy. So instead of this line of questioning working to impeach her #credibility, as intended, it’s coming off as a lawyer for a very rich person going after someone w/ less money for having less money.

Yes #Trump has exaggerated his wealth for the years, but he still has more money than the vast majority of the country.

Continued thread

#Colangelo, the prosecutor, responds, saying the judge’s findings that Trump violated his #GagOrder are directly relevant to Trump's #credibility if he takes the stand & points out there is case #law supporting his argument.

Justice Merchan has responded well to #CaseLaw - #precedent - in the past & has expressed frustration w/the defense when they don't cite any.

But Merchan agrees w/defense, saying it would be too prejudicial for a jury to hear that he held Trump in #contempt.

Continued thread

#Trump will likely be pleased w/Necheles's #VoirDire. She questioned the #credibility of those who are expected to testify against Trump, & made a reference to #MichaelCohen, suggesting that some #witnesses might want to seek “revenge” (the title of a Cohen books) on Trump. Cohen’s book is specifically named on the questionnaire.

Trump gives the hairy eyeball to jurors when Necheles suggests that a witness may be lying if they change the details of their story.