Scientists, researchers, and academics brought some of the funniest material ever to Twitter with the #overlyhonestmethods hashtag, taking a good jab at research, academic publishing, and the general unwritten ways things actually work in academia. Here’s a collection of some of the best “overly honest methods.” (Read those below, then check out the full stream here)

#overlyhonestmethods We kept pushing buttons in our favorite stats software until all our results has stars next to them
— David Winter (@TheAtavism) January 7, 2013

Data are available upon request, but we really hope no one will ask #overlyhonestmethods
— Heather Piwowar (@researchremix) January 8, 2013

What we lack in meaningful results we make up for with a witty pun in our title. #overlyhonestmethods — Dr. Twittenheimer (@DrTwittenheimer) January 8, 2013

Following completion of the survey, we completely rewrote our hypotheses in order to have them agree 100% with the data. #overlyhonestmethods — Liam Pomfret (@LiamPomfret) January 9, 2013

Authors 3-7 were added to get this paper through the blind review process. #overlyhonestmethods — Spencer M. Ross (@srossmktg) January 9, 2013

LITERATURE CITED (but not actually read) #overlyhonestmethods — Dr. Twittenheimer (@DrTwittenheimer) January 8, 2013

We’re citing this marginally relevant paper because it was written by the journal editor and a likely reviewer #overlyhonestmethods — experimental error (@significance) January 8, 2013

A two-way ANOVA with repeated measures was performed because reviewer 1 told us to. #OverlyHonestMethods — Mark Burnley (@DrMarkBurnley) January 8, 2013

A sample size of 12 was chosen because a qualified statistician was not present to complete the sample size estimate. #overlyhonestmethods

— Mike K Smith (@MikeKSmith) January 8, 2013

The results of the study were presented in third person passive voice to maximize the sciencyness of the paper. #overlyhonestmethods

— Dr. Twittenheimer (@DrTwittenheimer) January 8, 2013

Data were analyzed using SPSS, even though SAS is better, because we have a pirated version of SPSS that doesn’t expire #overlyhonestmethods

— deonandan (@deonandan) January 8, 2013

Our methods extend the techniques used by Smith et al., who stole the original idea from us at a conference. #overlyhonestmethods

— Peter Edmonds (@peterdedmonds) January 8, 2013

I don’t understand these statistics, but at least my coauthor does. So talk to him, please. #overlyhonestmethods

— Alexis Rudd (@SoundingTheSea) January 9, 2013

Data analyzed using mixed methods because I maxed my knowledge of qualitative and quantitative analysis #overlyhonestmethods

— Jennifer Borgioli (@DataDiva) January 9, 2013

This paper of mine was cited so that I can rank higher in Google Scholar. #overlyhonestmethods

— David Mittelman (@evolvability) January 8, 2013

Outliers have been removed from the dataset because the second author was drunk when he took the data. #overlyhonestmethods

— Brent Neal (@BrentN) January 8, 2013

We used a grounded theory approach as we didn’t understand the literature we were reviewing #overlyhonestmethods

— Charles Musselwhite (@charliemuss) January 8, 2013

We put “Bayesian” in the title so all the other scientists think we’re cool. #overlyhonestmethods
— Matt Wall (@m_wall) January 8, 2013

Though further work is needed to extend these exciting new observations, my contract has expired & I don’t care anymore #overlyhonestmethods

— real_psycience (@realpsycientist) January 8, 2013

Stark honesty right there folks. If this convinces you to join Twitter, don’t forget to connect with me @scottcowley.

P.S. Apologies for the exclusion of equally hilarious tweets involving labs, chemicals, and test animals. Business researchers don’t have all those things and we have less fun as a result.