John V. Kane

@UptonOrwell

Husband, father, prof. at @NYUCGA. Ph.D. Create @Stata guides, probably work too much, little sleep, sometimes make music: https://t.co/KmkvmnyuCl

2 818Followers

1 413Following

3 569Posts total

28.4KViews on collected posts

Against accounts of the same size

5 posts from the last 90 days, next to the under 10K follower range. reaches fewer people than peers, but engages them much harder.

Median views1 088this account7 156median for under 10K

Reach, %38.61%this account505.37%median for under 10K

Engagement, %1.39%this account1.06%median for under 10K

Metric	This account	Median for under 10K	Ratio
Median views per post	1 088	7 156	0.15×
Reach (views ÷ followers)	38.61%	5.1× audience	0.08×
Engagement rate	1.39%	1.06%	1.31×

Others in this range → Compare with another account → How these benchmarks are built →

Growth & engagement

How the posts we collected actually performed: views and reaction rate post by post, what the audience did with them, and where the follower count goes.

Views per post

22.2K31 Aug

1.1K

3.7K

431

Last 5 collected posts, oldest on the left. The scale is logarithmic: one post can outrun the rest a hundred times over.

Engagement rate per post

0.64%31 Aug

1.93%

0.96%

2.70%

1.39%

Reactions — likes, reposts, replies and quotes — divided by views. Median for under 10K accounts is 1.06%.

What the audience does

Likes64.3%178 in total

Reposts14.8%41 in total

Replies2.5%7 in total

Quotes1.8%5 in total

Bookmarks16.6%46 in total

Share of every reaction we collected for this account. Replies mean argument, reposts mean endorsement, bookmarks mean the post was worth keeping.

The follower curve appears once this account has two daily snapshots — we take one a day, and this one is on its first.

Latest posts

@UptonOrwell @JohnHolbein1 Absolutely agree with you, moreover when you have not statistical significant results reviewers always say "rejected paper" although you have written that these results can help yo develop new knowledge and create new models to analyse this trend in the 431 views · 6 likes · 0 reposts · 0 replies 31 Aug 2026 We think these results help shed light upon not just the "file drawer problem" and persistent bias against publishing null results, but also for the incentives facing researchers who care about their studies reaching the broader public.💡 1K views · 25 likes · 1 reposts · 1 replies 31 Aug 2026 Compared to "significant effects," null results lead citizens to: --View study as less important --Ask for less info --Be less willing to share it --Think journalists would be less likely to cover the study --See the study as being lower quality & researchers less competent 3.7K views · 28 likes · 3 reposts · 2 replies 31 Aug 2026 And it's not just about "noisy null" effects--though there's some variation across study type, the overall effects show that even precisely estimated nulls are disadvantaged relative to studies showing a "statistically significant effect." 1.1K views · 19 likes · 1 reposts · 1 replies 31 Aug 2026 🧐 What do citizens think about "null results" in scientific research? To find out, @JohnHolbein1 & I fielded a large-scale online experiment. We gave respondents straightforward info about a study, asked them some Qs, showed them the results, then asked them Qs again. https: 22.2K views · 100 likes · 36 reposts · 3 replies 31 Aug 2026