William Ngiam | 严祥全

William Ngiam | 严祥全

@williamngiam.github.io

Computational cognitive neuroscientist at Adelaide University | Perception, Attention, Learning and Memory Lab (https://palm-lab.github.io) | Open Practices Editor at Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics | ReproducibiliTea | http://williamngiam.github.io

1.7K followers869 following645 posts

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Just published open access in 𝘗𝘴𝘺𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘔𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘥𝘴: “𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗖𝗶𝗿𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮: 𝗔 𝗧𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗖𝗼𝗴𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗕𝗲𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵” 🔗 doi.org/10.1037/met0... 🙎 Co-authors: @bayslab.org, @ivntmc.bsky.social, @cjungerius.bsky.social, Xiaolu Wang, Julie de Falco, Zahara Gironés, Adam Triabhall

Researchers ought to operate at the level of theory and phenomena, rather than papers! A more fruitful replication would target the most precise measurement of the effect, over the original study design that discovered the effect (unless they are one and the same!). But.. (Context in quote below)

Berna Devezer@devezer.bsky.social

it is only fair that i share this post where i am accused of sharing misinformation. i stand behind my assessment. no information provided in this post changes my take. nowhere in my thread did i say anything about a video?? how very weird!! maybe best to read my research in long form.

View full thread

I had the same opinion at the start of the EEGManyLabs CDA paper (which I am a minor author); the design went to replicate the original 2004 study and not implement now-gained understanding of how to measure the CDA (though it did implement different behavioural measures). Still kinda worth it!

sciencedirect.comContralateral delay activity as a marker of visual working memory capacity: A multi-site registered replicationThe contralateral delay activity (CDA) is a widely used electrophysiological marker of visual working memory (VWM), yet recent work has questioned whe…

And let's not call out peer commentary or critique as misinformation at the drop of a hat. I find that to be a rather serious accusation given the current climate. Behaviours spread through platforms - we can have genuine discussion and intellectual humility, over spats that are to do about little.

Researchers ought to operate at the level of theory and phenomena, rather than papers! A more fruitful replication would target the most precise measurement of the effect, over the original study design that discovered the effect (unless they are one and the same!). But.. (Context in quote below)

Berna Devezer@devezer.bsky.social

it is only fair that i share this post where i am accused of sharing misinformation. i stand behind my assessment. no information provided in this post changes my take. nowhere in my thread did i say anything about a video?? how very weird!! maybe best to read my research in long form.

If one wants to replicate historic studies in modern contexts, go for it! It can be fun and interesting, but let's not presuppose it will be groundbreaking for the field. Exploring *how* the false memory effect holds up today gives shape to the phenomena (and has been done recently iirc).

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Join us for our annual open science speaker series at Flinders University. James Heathers will be talking about his new work conducting forensic metascience at a massive scale, taking observations about data accuracy and applying them across the entire body of published human science.

Worth reading the developing thread below! I've been thinking along similar lines, but instead of more labels, I have been thinking moreso in a mathematical modelling framework: what we consider a "representation" and what we consider a "process" (partly inspired by Grace's book Models of the Mind!)

This post is unavailable.
View full thread

I think about all the models (evidence accumulation, signal-detection, etc.) that can be applied to a variety of contexts. Are we all studying the same process – a Thurstonian model of latent variables in the mind – but simply with different contexts? Or are there different mechanisms we can detail?

Worth reading the developing thread below! I've been thinking along similar lines, but instead of more labels, I have been thinking moreso in a mathematical modelling framework: what we consider a "representation" and what we consider a "process" (partly inspired by Grace's book Models of the Mind!)

This post is unavailable.

I think many conceptualise the different fields of visual cognition (attention, working memory, etc.) as different mechanisms/processes but without definition of what those mechanisms are operating upon (i.e. the "representation"). What if it's the same process, but simply different representations?

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

In our course and book _Calling Bullshit_, we posit that If something seems too good, or too bad, to be true, it probably is. Now as a college professor I'm pretty confident that overreliance can AI can harm our thinking ability, but just ten minutes of use? Let's dig into this this study a bit.

news.berkeley.eduUsing AI for just 10 minutes erodes your ability to persist at hard things - Berkeley NewsA UC Berkeley researcher co-authored a study that raises profound questions about how we interact with artificial intelligence in education — and daily life.

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

☕️Shape the future of Open Research: Join the ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee for 2027! We are thrilled to announce that applications are officially open to join the ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee starting in early 2027.

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026 “A decade on & decades ahead” 🌟 Spotlight: Keynote Speakers & Closing Remarks We are thrilled to spotlight our opening and closing keynotes.

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Recruiting a new PhD student to start Fall 2027. Research would focus on Visual Working Memory, possibly with a developmental approach (but not necessarily). Check out my lab website where the are links to the application and contact info if you have questions. rickermemorylab.com

rickermemorylab.comMemory & Attention LaboratoryThe Memory and Attention Laboratory at the University of South Dakota is part of the Human Factors & Applied Cognition  program in the Department of Psychology . We study memory, attention, and...

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Our department at UC San Diego is hiring a new tenure-track Assistant Professor. Open area, research addressing foundational issues in cogsci using modern computational methods. I love my department, and you will too. Apply!! apol-recruit.ucsd.edu/JPF04633 #cogscisci #cogsci #DevPsyc #PsychSciSky

apol-recruit.ucsd.eduAssistant Professor in Cognitive ScienceUniversity of California, San Diego is hiring. Apply now!

Check out the reusability checker ShinyApp! It's very useful for making sure your data repositories are in good condition before the upcoming read-only freeze of OSF repositories.

Dan Quintana@dsquintana.bsky.social

And if you want to see how your OSF repos compare against this corpus in terms of usability try my OSF reusability checker app. This app also provides tips if it flags any potential issues dsquintana.shinyapps.io/osf-reusabil...

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

New preprint! 🎉 I analysed 1660 papers from 4 psychology journals and found materials sharing went from 9% of papers in 2015 to 82% in 2025, and these materials *do* get downloaded — a median of 135 times each. BUT shared code is often hard to run. doi.org/10.31234/osf... Let's walk through it 🧵

📅 Make sure that you have the ReproducibiliTea conference marked in your calendars on Friday! I will be chairing the first session where we look at some of the issues around computational reproducibility including statistical interpretation, sleuthing and review, and dissemination. Link below👇

reproducibilitea.orgSession 1: Big Problems in Reproducibility · Spilling the ReproducibiliTea 2026Where does reproducibility break down? Four short talks on computational reproducibility, the misuse of statistics, paper mills and research fraud, and what the editorial process can and cannot catch ...

If psychological judgments of similarity are non-metric (Tversky, 1977), and we are evaluating similarity of neural representations by using metric spaces (like Procrustes distance), then how does that mismatch get resolved for neural representations of similarity?

Can we put OpenAI/Anthropic/etc. through any Institutional Review Board / Research Ethics Committee? It would be so fun to watch them implode from all the administrative barriers and minutiae they have to get through to do their "research" (let alone address all the actual ethical issues).

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Is your lab doing research in developmental cognitive psychology? Are you looking for (online) speakers for your lab meetings? Then perhaps reach out to Jenny.

Jenny Wang 👶 🧮@jinjingjenny1.bsky.social

Thank you for the tip! Online talk is a great idea!! (and I'd be happy to give an online talk in (the generic) your department/lab! if my research is relevant, of course!)

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

🚨Update: Our analysis of global APC expenditure has now been expanded to cover more publishers (7 -> 14) and more years (2019-2025). We estimate $15B in APCs paid over seven years, $3.7B in 2025 alone. Elsevier crosses the $1B threshold by itself in 2025. arxiv.org/abs/2608.16322 #ScholComm

Eric Schares@eschares.bsky.social

🚨 Preprint! We combine our recent open dataset of #APC prices with the article counts per journal-year from #OpenAlex to estimate how much the academic community has paid in APCs over the last 5 years. A. $8.349 billion ($8.968 B in 2023 USD) $2.5B in 2023 alone. arxiv.org/abs/2407.16551 #metasci

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

With the upcoming changes to OSF, DataPipe (pipe.jspsych.org) is migrating to a multi-backend model. We're currently developing support for Zenodo, Dataverse, and Google Drive. If there are other providers that you'd like to see as options please get in touch.

pipe.jspsych.orgDataPipe

COS is announcing important changes to the Open Science Framework (OSF). OSF Projects—used for project collaboration, file mgmt, & storage—is being phased out as an active workspace over the next 6 months. This change does not affect persistence & accessibility of existing public projects. (🧵1/2)

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

New Blog post: Which Data Repository Should you Use? In light of OSF closing down, I compare Zenodo, Dataverse, ResearchBox, PsychArchive, and local repositories on six important dimensions. If you want to know which to pick: It depends! daniellakens.blogspot.com/2026/08/whic...

daniellakens.blogspot.comWhich Data Repository Should You Use?The Center for Open Science has announced that from November 16, 2026, no new projects can be created on the Open Science Framework. After F...

I've been data editing for Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics for a year and a bit now; I feel slightly vindicated for nagging people about READMEs in their repositories and to organise their files. Note that you won't be able to make edits to existing repos from mid-February onwards!

Jonathan Peelle@jpeelle.bsky.social

Yikes “Starting November 16, 2026, no new projects or child components of existing projects can be created on OSF. After February 19, 2027, all public and private OSF projects will become read-only.” www.cos.io/osf-changes

On a quick skim, the core function that OSF will fulfil is registration of studies (plus protocols and analysis plans) and hosting preprints. This means we will need to find data repositories for new projects following mid-November; perhaps Github, Zenodo, or university-operated commons.

Jonathan Peelle@jpeelle.bsky.social

Yikes “Starting November 16, 2026, no new projects or child components of existing projects can be created on OSF. After February 19, 2027, all public and private OSF projects will become read-only.” www.cos.io/osf-changes

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Yikes “Starting November 16, 2026, no new projects or child components of existing projects can be created on OSF. After February 19, 2027, all public and private OSF projects will become read-only.” www.cos.io/osf-changes

cos.ioOSF Changes | Center for Open ScienceWe are preparing substantial changes to OSF that will reduce its functionality, focus OSF on its unique strengths, and move toward an integrated model with complementary services. As part of that shif...

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

New preprint! Have you ever wanted to measure psychometric functions in high-dimensional stimulus spaces, but realised that this is infeasible? We present and validate a technique to adaptively estimate psychometric functions for stimulus spaces up to 50 dimensions. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...

biorxiv.orgAdaptive experiments in high-dimensional feature spaces: A particle filtering approachBehavioral experiments are often infeasible when stimulus spaces have many dimensions or when testing time is limited. One way to address this challenge is adaptive stimulus selection, where informati...

Ever thought meta-research and Open Science needed a virtual conference that all could attend? @reproducibilitea.org is putting one together in September, with the program shaping up to be insightful and impactful. Please reach out if you would like to help! reproducibilitea.org/conference2026

reproducibilitea.orgSpilling the ReproducibiliTea 2026An online conference on reproducibility in research: open discussions, fresh perspectives, and community building with researchers worldwide.

William Ngiam | 严祥全 reposted

Interested in doing a postdoc with me in Auckland, New Zealand? 🇳🇿 See info below on a competitive award opportunity, and please spread the word!