Member of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's Strategic Council for Research Excellence, Integrity, and Trust (2021-present). The Council serves as a venue for multiple stakeholders to advance collectively the integrity, ethics, resilience, and effectiveness of the research enterprise, while at the same time preparing it for tomorrow's challenges. The Strategic Council will develop guiding principles, highlight best practices for improving research, and connect stakeholders throughout the research eco-system.
(Chair of the Roundtable on the Communication and Use of the Social and Behavioral Sciences 2015-2018). The mission of this roundtable is to support the communication and use of reliable and relevant scientific research for decision-making. While focused on social and behavioral science, we seek to increase the public value of all science.
The Center for Open Science (Chairman of the Board 2014-2018) provides instruction, infrastructure, and incentives for increasing transparency in scientific research.
(Co-founder with Diana Mutz) TESS is an NSF-funded infrastructure project called Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences (TESS) that offers researchers opportunities to test their experimental ideas on large, diverse, randomly-selected subject populations.
(Principal Investigator with Jon A. Krosnick, 2005-2009 ) The mission of the National Election Studies (NES) is to produce high quality data on voting, public opinion, and political participation that serve the research needs of social scientists, teachers, students, policy makers and journalists concerned with the theoretical and empirical foundations of mass politics in a democratic society.
In the fall of 2002, I advised the Brennan Center for Justice and the US Department of Justice on social scientific matters central to litigation over the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. The case was first heard by a panel of three District Court Justice and then referred automatically to the Supreme Court. Two of the three District Court judges ruled in favor of the Act. These same two judges, one a Bill Clinton appointee and the other a George W. Bush appointee, based their opinions on a careful examination of the relevant social scientific arguments including my own. The Supreme Court later affirmed these opinions. You can read their arguments here.