Podcasts about lakens

We venture into the darker corners of the gurusphere and marvel at some very, very brave individuals, their valiant efforts to play devil's advocate, and some world-class discourse surfing skills. Join us, won't you?Supplementary Material 31: Aquatic Nightmares, Strategic Obliviousness, & Race Realists00:00 Introduction & Ol Squeaky Cameo02:57 Matt's Aquarium Trauma & Stress Dreams09:45 RFK Jr's war on science continues11:17 Robert Malone & other 'Covid Contrarians' rewarded under Trump14:35 The LA Protests, Riots, and Anti-Immigrant Narratives20:12 Flint Dibble calls out Joe Rogan25:24 Joe Rogan is a polemical ideologue and anti-vaccine advocate27:34 Cassandra Kavanagh?32:37 If Books Could Kill on Lab Leak35:10 Popular Perceptions of the Covid Pandemic vs Reality38:38 Debating COVID-19 Measures38:59 Clarifying the Role of Sam's Manager42:56 Discussing Trump, Musk, and DOGE's Political Impact47:12 The Meaning Crisis and the Comfort of Religion50:35 The Effects of Social Media53:15 Matt and Chris Friendly Shadowboxing56:19 The horror of directly stating your opinions58:14 Sam Harris' Preparation for Conversations01:05:02 Strategic Obliviousness01:12:26 A little bit of TRT Discourse01:16:17 Lex's Insufferable Tweet:  Celebrating Humanity and Responding to Critics01:18:46 The Bravery of the All In Podcast Besties01:20:33 Elon Musk and Donald Trump: A Complex Relationship01:23:42 Mike from PA and Dunking Safely Online01:26:10 Scientific Racism and Controversial Podcasts01:34:02 Paul Bloom and Subjective Redlines01:41:10 The Neo-Nazi Smoke in the Race Realism World01:48:36 Daniël Lakens on Bryan Johnson on Mortality Salience01:50:16 Matt's Foodie Corner01:52:21 OutroThe full episode is available for Patreon subscribers (1hr 54 mins).Join us at: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurusSourcesBBC- RFK Jr appoints new US vaccine advisers after sacking committeeFlint Dibble's New Video: Joe Rogan's Cult of Fake ArchaeologyLex Fridman's Insufferable TweetSam Harris EPISODE 419 "More From Sam": Elon vs. Trump, Religion, Jordan Peterson, & Rapid Fire QuestionsThe All In Besties being cowardsThe Guardian: Harvard author Steven Pinker appears on podcast linked to scientific racismSteven Pinker on AporiaHope Not Hate's investigation into Aporia and related race science networksIf Books Could Kill: The Lab Leak Goes Mainstream

Persone wat trauma beleef is bang en onseker, en het ondersteuning nodig om hulle deur hierdie donker tyd te neem. Dit is hier waar traumaberaders ‘n baie belangrike rol speel. Hulle is die spreekbuis tussen die familie, die pasiënt, en die traumachirurg. Tharien Oosthuizen het tyd spandeer met Rian Steenkamp, ‘n traumaberader by Netcare Milpark in Johannesburg, en met drie mense wat deur trauma geraak is.

Broad, W. J., & Wade, N. (1983). Betrayers of the truth. New York : Simon and Schuster. http://archive.org/details/betrayersoftruth00broa Wolfgang Stroebe, Tom Postmes, & Russell Spears. (2012). Scientific Misconduct and the Myth of Self-Correction in Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 670–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460687   Zotero can track if you are citing retractions: https://retractionwatch.com/2019/06/12/want-to-check-for-retractions-in-your-personal-library-and-get-alerts-for-free-now-you-can/   100% CI blog: The Untold Mystery of Rogue RA https://www.the100.ci/2024/12/18/rogue-ra/   Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 635–659. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089193   Senior RIKEN scientist involved in stem cell scandal commits suicide https://www.science.org/content/article/senior-riken-scientist-involved-stem-cell-scandal-commits-suicide   Kis, A., Tur, E. M., Lakens, D., Vaesen, K., & Houkes, W. (2022). Leaving academia: PhD attrition and unhealthy research environments. PLOS ONE, 17(10), e0274976. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274976

"Mais parceque !"Vous avez surement déjà entendu un enfant, ou même une personne, essayer de se justifier avec cette phrase. En utilisant le mot "parceque". Ce qui se cache derrière cette formulation, qui linguistiquement a peu de sens, est la notion presque universelle d'importance.Maitriser la notion d'importance vous permettra de persuader avec plus de force. Dans cet épisode de l'art du mentaliste, on explore comment faire concrètement pour augmenter la sensation d'importance dans nos propos, pour leader et persuader avec plus de force.Un épisode riche et impactant.Références :- Frey, Bruno S., and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. "The cost of price incentives: An empirical analysis of motivation crowding-out." The American economic review 87.4 (1997): 746-755.- Jostmann, N., Lakens, D., & Schubert, T. (2009). Weight as an Embodiment of Importance. Psychological Science, 20, 1169 - 1174- Langer, E., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B. (1978). The mindlessness of Ostensibly Thoughtful Action: The Role of “Placebic” Information in Interpersonal Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(6), 635-642.- Emmet DM. On the Idea of Importance. Philosophy. 1946;21(80):234-244. doi:10.1017/S0031819100005520L'art du mentaliste, un podcast animé par Taha Mansour et Alexis Dieux, musique par Antoine Piolé.Retrouvez Taha Mansour :- Son site : www.tahamansour.com- Instagram / Facebook : @TahaMentalismeRetrouvez Alexis Dieux :- Son site : https://www.alexisdieux.com/- Instagram : @alexisdieuxhypnose

OK, we may have a problem. Here, in this, our fourth attempt at a final episode, we welcome our friends from the excellent Nullius In Verba podcast Daniël Lakens and Smriti Mehta (yes THAT Smriti Mehta) to discuss why psychology is worthless. Or whether psychology is worthless. Something like that. Anyway, enjoy! This is the last one for sure...

‼️ De serie ‘No' van de Canadese Kaitlin Prest behoort volgens Maartje Duin tot het allerbeste dat in haar discipline is gemaakt. De podcast van Prest gaat over consent en seksueel grensoverschrijdend gedrag, met name in de intimiteit van de slaapkamer.  

In today's episode, we discuss critically reading and appraising scientific articles. How do we select which articles to read carefully? Which heuristics are useful for assessing paper quality? And do open science practices actually lead to better quality papers? Enjoy.    Shownotes Bacon, F. (1625). Of Studies.  PNAS Submissions contributed by NAS members "The contributing member submits the manuscript to PNAS along with the names of at least two experts in the field of the paper who have agreed to review the work and brief comments about why each of those reviewers was chosen."  https://www.pnas.org/pb-assets/authors/ifora-1720190309383.pdf  How many p-values just below 0.05 should we expect across multiple tests?  https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-probability-of-p-values-as-function.html  Lakens, D. (2024). When and How to Deviate From a Preregistration. Collabra: Psychology, 10(1), 117094. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.117094  TIER protocol: https://www.projecttier.org/tier-protocol/protocol-4-0/  Gino fraud investigation and excel meta-data: https://datacolada.org/109  REAPPRAISED checklist: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03959-6  Yang, Z., & Hung, I. W. (2021). Creative thinking facilitates perspective taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(2), 278.  

Read the full transcript here. How much should we trust social science papers in top journals? How do we know a paper is trustworthy? Do large datasets mitigate p-hacking? Why doesn't psychology as a field seem to be working towards a grand unified theory? Why aren't more psychological theories written in math? Or are other scientific fields mathematicized to a fault? How do we make psychology cumulative? How can we create environments, especially in academia, that incentivize constructive criticism? Why isn't peer review pulling its weight in terms of catching errors and constructively criticizing papers? What kinds of problems simply can't be caught by peer review? Why is peer review saved for the very end of the publication process? What is "importance hacking"? On what bits of psychological knowledge is there consensus among researchers? When and why do adversarial collaborations fail? Is admission of error a skill that can be taught and learned? How can students be taught that p-hacking is problematic without causing them to over-correct into a failure to explore their problem space thoroughly and efficiently?Daniel Lakens is an experimental psychologist working at the Human-Technology Interaction group at Eindhoven University of Technology. In addition to his empirical work in cognitive and social psychology, he works actively on improving research methods and statistical inferences, and has published on the importance of replication research, sequential analyses and equivalence testing, and frequentist statistics. Follow him on Twitter / X at @Lakens.Further reading:Nullius in Verba (Daniel's podcast) StaffSpencer Greenberg — Host / DirectorJosh Castle — ProducerRyan Kessler — Audio EngineerUri Bram — FactotumWeAmplify — TranscriptionistsMusicBroke for FreeJosh WoodwardLee RosevereQuiet Music for Tiny Robotswowamusiczapsplat.comAffiliatesClearer ThinkingGuidedTrackMind EasePositlyUpLift[Read more]

In this episode, we continue our discussion of replications. We talk about how to analyze replication studies, which studies are worth replicating, and what is the status of replications in other scientific disciplines.    Shownotes Mack, R. W. (1951). The Need for Replication Research in Sociology. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 93–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087978 Smith, N. C. (1970). Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psychological research. American Psychologist, 25(10), 970–975. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029774 Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of Scientific Research: Evaluating Experimental Data in Psychology (New edition). Cambridge Center for Behavioral. Ebersole, C. R., Mathur, M. B., Baranski, E., Bart-Plange, D.-J., Buttrick, N. R., Chartier, C. R., Corker, K. S., Corley, M., Hartshorne, J. K., IJzerman, H., Lazarević, L. B., Rabagliati, H., Ropovik, I., Aczel, B., Aeschbach, L. F., Andrighetto, L., Arnal, J. D., Arrow, H., Babincak, P., … Nosek, B. A. (2020). Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920958687 Isager, P. M., van Aert, R. C. M., Bahník, Š., Brandt, M. J., DeSoto, K. A., Giner-Sorolla, R., Krueger, J. I., Perugini, M., Ropovik, I., van 't Veer, A. E., Vranka, M., & Lakens, D. (2023). Deciding what to replicate: A decision model for replication study selection under resource and knowledge constraints. Psychological Methods, 28(2), 438–451. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000438 Aldhous, P. (2011). Journal rejects studies contradicting precognition. New Scientist. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20447-journal-rejects-studies-contradicting-precognition/ Stanley, D. J., & Spence, J. R. (2014). Expectations for Replications: Are Yours Realistic? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(3), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614528518 Simonsohn, U. (2015). Small telescopes: Detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychological Science, 26(5), 559–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614567341 Nosek, B.A., Errington, T.M. (2017) Reproducibility in Cancer Biology: Making sense of replications. eLife 6:e23383. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23383      

In the next two episodes, we will discuss replication studies, which are essential to building reliable scientific knowledge.   Shownotes Mack, R. W. (1951). The Need for Replication Research in Sociology. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 93–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087978 Smith, N. C. (1970). Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psychological research. American Psychologist, 25(10), 970–975. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029774 Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of Scientific Research: Evaluating Experimental Data in Psychology (New edition). Cambridge Center for Behavioral. Ebersole, C. R., Mathur, M. B., Baranski, E., Bart-Plange, D.-J., Buttrick, N. R., Chartier, C. R., Corker, K. S., Corley, M., Hartshorne, J. K., IJzerman, H., Lazarević, L. B., Rabagliati, H., Ropovik, I., Aczel, B., Aeschbach, L. F., Andrighetto, L., Arnal, J. D., Arrow, H., Babincak, P., … Nosek, B. A. (2020). Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920958687 Isager, P. M., van Aert, R. C. M., Bahník, Š., Brandt, M. J., DeSoto, K. A., Giner-Sorolla, R., Krueger, J. I., Perugini, M., Ropovik, I., van 't Veer, A. E., Vranka, M., & Lakens, D. (2023). Deciding what to replicate: A decision model for replication study selection under resource and knowledge constraints. Psychological Methods, 28(2), 438–451. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000438 Aldhous, P. (2011). Journal rejects studies contradicting precognition. New Scientist. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20447-journal-rejects-studies-contradicting-precognition/ Stanley, D. J., & Spence, J. R. (2014). Expectations for Replications: Are Yours Realistic? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(3), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614528518 Simonsohn, U. (2015). Small telescopes: Detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychological Science, 26(5), 559–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614567341  

Journalist Hanneke Mijnster schrijft voor Libelle, RTL Nieuws en Psychologie Magazine en heeft een indrukwekkende serie aan boeken op haar naam staan. Ze weet sinds een jaar dat ze ADHD heeft. De diagnose voelde als het vinden van haar blauwdruk, ergens in een stoffig laatje op zolder. Ze vraagt zich af wat dat nou eigenlijk betekent voor de verschillende rollen in haar leven. Als collega, als moeder, als vriendin en ook in bed. Dus schreef ze er een boek over, 'Hé is dit ook ADHD?'. Deze podcast episode noemen we 'The looove chapter'. Want we gaan lullen over Alle Dagen DRKS tussen de lakens. Ga er lekker voor zitten, als je aan de wandel bent zet je poker-face op, want dit wordt smullen!  Voor we de lakens induiken beantwoordt Hanneke de (deze keer) 6 ja/nee vragen, praat ze openhartig over haar eigen bewogen reis rondom haar diagnose en deelt ze haar fantastische, kwetsbare en vooral herkenbare verhalen. We hebben het over wat associaties en Dennis Bergkamp te maken hebben met je seksleven, hoezeer voorspel in veel gevallen zwaar overrated is en wat er gebeurd als je opeens een niet te stoppen drang hebt om overal op te drukken tijdens het geven van je magic. (ja: dit gebeurt echt

Blokkeer je steeds tussen de lakens? Deze tips gaan je helpen. Luister gerust de podcast. --------------- Dankjewel voor het luisteren! Het is te gek als je deze podcastaflevering deelt of 5-sterren geeft als je 'm interessant vindt om te luisteren! Wil je geen aflevering missen? Wordt dan abonnee, zodat je een seintje krijgt als er een nieuwe podcast klaarstaat. Wil je mij graag als therapeut zodat ook jouw blokkades en struggles worden doorbroken? Neem gerust contact met me op: https://mechieceelen.nl/#contact Connecten op social media? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mechieceelen.nl/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/me?trk=p_mwlite_feed_updates-secondary_nav Ps: mijn podcast is puur, rauw en onbewerkt!

In deze boeiende derde aflevering nemen Anne en Tijs je mee naar de rauwe realiteit van de eerste weken na de ontdekking van Annes overspel. Vluchten, vechten of bevriezen? Anne en Tijs kozen ervoor om te vechten. Hoewel ze herhaaldelijk hun koffers pakten om te vertrekken, weerstonden ze uiteindelijk de verleiding van de makkelijkste weg. Samen in hun eigen bubbel hebben ze deze moeilijke tijd met intense hoogtepunten en diepe dalen doorstaan, waarbij emoties alle kanten op gingen, van hartstochtelijke seks tot verhitte scheldpartijen. Het (gezins)leven draaide door, ook figuurlijk. Hoe voorkom je dat alles uit de hand loopt? Hoe deel je het met je kinderen, vrienden en familie? En hoe vermijd je dat je volledig de controle verliest en beslissingen neemt in een waas van heftige emoties waar je later spijt van krijgt? info@metanneentijs.nl tijs@metanneentijs.nl anne@metenneentijs.nl

Wil je meer diepgang tussen de lakens maar lukt het elke niet? Luister dan naar deze podcast. Vol met tips wat je kunt doen om het te verbeteren. Tips hebben niks met seks te maken ;-). --------------- Dankjewel voor het luisteren! Het is te gek als je deze podcastaflevering deelt of 5-sterren geeft als je 'm interessant vindt om te luisteren! Wil je geen aflevering missen? Wordt dan abonnee, zodat je een seintje krijgt als er een nieuwe podcast klaarstaat. Wil je mij graag als therapeut zodat ook jouw blokkades en struggles worden doorbroken? Neem gerust contact met me op: https://mechieceelen.nl/#contact Connecten op social media? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mechieceelen.nl/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/me?trk=p_mwlite_feed_updates-secondary_nav Ps: mijn podcast is puur, rauw en onbewerkt!

Luister hier naar de aflevering over controlegedrag, wat de impact is tussen de lakens, wat de oorzaak is en wat je kunt doen om er vanaf te komen. --------------- Dankjewel voor het luisteren! Het is te gek als je deze podcastaflevering deelt of 5-sterren geeft als je 'm interessant vindt om te luisteren! Wil je geen aflevering missen? Wordt dan abonnee, zodat je een seintje krijgt als er een nieuwe podcast klaarstaat. Wil je mij graag als therapeut zodat ook jouw blokkades en struggles worden doorbroken? Neem gerust contact met me op: https://mechieceelen.nl/#contact Connecten op social media? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mechieceelen.nl/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/me?trk=p_mwlite_feed_updates-secondary_nav Ps: mijn podcast is puur, rauw en onbewerkt!

In today's episode, we continue our conversation about preregistration. How flexible can we be when we preregister, without increasing flexibility in our analysis? How well do people preregister, and what does a good preregistration look like? And how do we deal with deviations from preregistrations?   Shownotes   Dubin, R. (1969). Theory building. Free Press. His full quote is: "There is no more devastating commendation that the self-designated theorist makes of the researcher than to label his work purely descriptive".  Claesen, A., Gomes, S., Tuerlinckx, F., & Vanpaemel, W. (2021). Comparing dream to reality: An assessment of adherence of the first generation of preregistered studies. Royal Society Open Science, 8(10), 211037. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211037 Akker, O. van den, Bakker, M., Assen, M. A. L. M. van, Pennington, C. R., Verweij, L., Elsherif, M., Claesen, A., Gaillard, S. D. M., Yeung, S. K., Frankenberger, J.-L., Krautter, K., Cockcroft, J. P., Kreuer, K. S., Evans, T. R., Heppel, F., Schoch, S. F., Korbmacher, M., Yamada, Y., Albayrak-Aydemir, N., … Wicherts, J. (2023). The effectiveness of preregistration in psychology: Assessing preregistration strictness and preregistration-study consistency. MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/h8xjw Sequential analysis and alpha spending functions https://lakens.github.io/statistical_inferences/10-sequential.html  Bishop, D. V. M. (2018). Fallibility in Science: Responding to Errors in the Work of Oneself and Others. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 2515245918776632. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918776632 FDAAA Trial Tracker https://fdaaa.trialstracker.net  Ensinck, E., & Lakens, D. (2023). An Inception Cohort Study Quantifying How Many Registered Studies are Published. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5hkjz Quantitude episode on preregistration https://quantitudepod.org/s3e07-in-defense-of-researcher-degrees-of-freedom/  Lakens, D. (2023). When and How to Deviate from a Preregistration. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ha29k   

Veel vrouwen in mijn praktijk worstelen ermee dat er geen diepgang (meer) is tussen de lakens. Luister hier wat het geheim is en natuurlijk weer tips om toe te passen. --------------- Dankjewel voor het luisteren! Het is te gek als je deze podcastaflevering deelt of 5-sterren geeft als je 'm interessant vindt om te luisteren! Wil je geen aflevering missen? Wordt dan abonnee, zodat je een seintje krijgt als er een nieuwe podcast klaarstaat. Wil je mij graag als therapeut zodat ook jouw blokkades en struggles worden doorbroken? Neem gerust contact met me op: https://mechieceelen.nl/#contact Connecten op social media? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mechieceelen.nl/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/me?trk=p_mwlite_feed_updates-secondary_nav Ps: mijn podcast is puur, rauw en onbewerkt! Enjoy!

In this two part episode we discuss the fine art of preregistration. We go back into the history of preregistration, its evolution, and current use. Do we preregister to control the Type 1 error rate, or to show that we derived our prediction from theory a priori? Can and should we preregister exploratory or secondary data analysis? And how severe is the issue of severe testing?   Shownotes ClinicalTrials.gov You can preregister on AsPredicted and the OSF Johnson, M. (1975). Models of Control and Control of Bias. European Journal of Parapsychology, 36–44. SPIRIT Checklist Bishop, D. V. M. (2018). Fallibility in Science: Responding to Errors in the Work of Oneself and Others. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 432–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918776632 FDA trials tracker: https://fdaaa.trialstracker.net  Ensinck, E., & Lakens, D. (2023). An Inception Cohort Study Quantifying How Many Registered Studies are Published. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/5hkjz van den Akker, O. R., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Enting, M., de Jonge, M., Ong, H. H., Rüffer, F., Schoenmakers, M., Stoevenbelt, A. H., Wicherts, J. M., & Bakker, M. (2023). Selective Hypothesis Reporting in Psychology: Comparing Preregistrations and Corresponding Publications. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 6(3), 25152459231187988. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231187988 Claesen, A., Gomes, S., Tuerlinckx, F., & Vanpaemel, W. (2021). Comparing dream to reality: An assessment of adherence of the first generation of preregistered studies. Royal Society Open Science, 8(10), 211037. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211037 Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66(6), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020412 Rosenthal, R. (1966). Experimenter effects in behavioral research. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Johnson, M. (1975). Models of Control and Control of Bias. European Journal of Parapsychology, 36–44. de Groot, A. D. (1969). Methodology. Mouton & Co. Claesen, A., Lakens, D., Vanpaemel, W., & Dongen, N. van. (2022). Severity and Crises in Science: Are We Getting It Right When We're Right and Wrong When We're Wrong? PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ekhc8  

In deze podcast aflevering vertel ik hoe het komt dat (oude) menstruatiepijn impact kan hebben op je seksleven. Wil je meer weten of ben je benieuwd of ik iets voor jou kan betekenen, neem dan gerust contact met me op: https://mechieceelen.nl/#contact

Bij de gedachte aan 'ik moet ook een keer het initiatief nemen' schoot mijn cliënt in de 'bevries' stand. Luister hier wat ik heb gedaan!

We are back with more geeky academic discussion than you can shake a stick at. This week we are doing our bit to save civilization by discussing issues in contemporary science, the replication crisis, and open science reforms with fellow psychologists/meta-scientists/podcasters, Daniël Lakens and Smriti Mehta. Both Daniël and Smriti are well known for their advocacy for methodological reform and have been hosting a (relatively) new podcast, Nullius in Verba, all about 'science—what it is and what it could be'. We discuss a range of topics including questionable research practices, the implications of the replication crisis, responsible heterodoxy, and the role of different communication modes in shaping discourses. Also featuring: exciting AI chat, Lex and Elon being teenage edge lords, feedback on the Huberman episode, and as always updates on Matt's succulents.Back soon with a Decoding episode!LinksNullius in Verba PodcastLee Jussim's Timeline on the Klaus Fiedler Controversy and a list of articles/sources covering the topicElon Musk: War, AI, Aliens, Politics, Physics, Video Games, and Humanity | Lex Fridman Podcast #400Daniel's MOOC on Improving Your Statistical InferenceCritical commentary on Fiedler controversy at Replicability-Index

Hebben mannen echt meer zin dan vrouwen? Wist je dat vrouwen een ingebouwde penis hebben? Wat gaat er precies mis als je tijdens het vrijen stiekem in je hoofd een boodschappenlijstje voor morgen maakt? En wist je dat het goed is om seks in te plannen en dan achteraf nog een appje te sturen? Nou, ik zat spreekwoordelijk met mijn oren te klapperen tijdens dit tweede gesprek met seksuoloog Astrid Kremers, waarin ze goede oplossingen geeft voor een probleem waar jij misschien mee zit... 

In this episode, we continue our conversation on the replication crisis⏤Which methodological, theoretical, and practical concerns did psychologists raise half a century ago? What has changed, and what remains the same, during the current crisis?    Shownotes Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17(11), 776–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043424 Rosenthal, R. (1966). Experimenter effects in behavioral research. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034436 Koole, S. L., & Lakens, D. (2012). Rewarding replications: A sure and simple way to improve psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 608–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612462586 Greenwald, A. G. (Ed.). (1976). An editorial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078635 Ring, K. (1967). Experimental social psychology: Some sober questions about some frivolous values. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Ledgerwood, A., & Sherman, J. W. (2012). Short, sweet, and problematic? The rise of the short report in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 60–66. Barber, T. X. (1976). Pitfalls in Human Research: Ten Pivotal Points. Pergamon Press. Dunnette, M. D. (1966). Fads, fashions, and folderol in psychology. American Psychologist, 21(4), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023535 Babbage, C. (1830). Reflections on the Decline of Science in England: And on Some of Its Causes. B. Fellowes.  

Dans cette deuxième partie de l'entretien consacré à l'intégrité scientifique, Cyril Forestier détaille les principales formes d'inconduites scientifiques, les moyens qu'il utilise pour les détecter ainsi que de nombreux outils en ligne pour améliorer la qualité des travaux de recherche et exercer notre esprit critique en tant que lecteur. Références : Brown, Nick & Heathers, James. (2016). The GRIM Test: A Simple Technique Detects Numerous Anomalies in the Reporting of Results in Psychology. Social Psychological and Personality Science. O'Connell, Neil & Moore, Andrew & Stewart, Gavin & Fisher, Emma & Hearn, Leslie & Eccleston, Christopher & Williams, Amanda. (2022). Investigating the veracity of a sample of divergent published trial data in spinal pain. Pain. Publish Ahead of Print. Ferraro, Michael & Moore, Andrew & Williams, Amanda & Fisher, Emma & Stewart, Gavin & Ferguson, McKenzie & Eccleston, Christopher & O'Connell, Neil. (2023). Characteristics of retracted publications related to pain research: a systematic review. Pain. Publish Ahead of Print. Dr James Heathers | Tomf***ery, A Redux: Academic distortions beyond regular bad science. Vidéoconférence disponible sur la chaîne Youtube de RIOT Science Club Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M. & Tice, D. M. Ego Depletion: Is the Active Self a Limited Resource? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1252–1265 (1998) Daniël Lakens. Improving Your Statistical Inferences | Website.  Musique : Epic Rock. Alex Grohl. Envato Elements

Smriti Mehta is a Ph.D. student in Psychology at the University of California Berkeley, and the co-chair of UC Berkeley's new Heterodox Academy (HxA) Campus Community, which is dedicated to promoting open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement on their campus. I (Matt) co-chair a similar group at University of Colorado Boulder. We discuss what it's like to start an HxA Campus Community, why it's needed, what the hurdles are, and how we might overcome them. Smriti's podcast can be found here: Nullius in Verba | a podcast by Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens (podbean.com) 

Shownotes Wilson, E. B. (1923). The Statistical Significance of Experimental Data. Science, 58(1493), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.58.1493.93 van Dongen, N. N. N., & van Grootel, L. (2021). Overview on the Null Hypothesis Significance Test. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hwk4n Stark, P. B., & Saltelli, A. (2018). Cargo‐cult statistics and scientific crisis. Significance, 15(4), 40-43. Uygun Tunç, D., Tunç, M. N., & Lakens, D. (2023). The epistemic and pragmatic function of dichotomous claims based on statistical hypothesis tests. Theory & Psychology, 09593543231160112. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543231160112 Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66(6), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020412 Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45(12), 1304–1312. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.12.1304 Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49(12), 997–1003. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.997 Cohen, J. (1995). The earth is round ( p 

In this episode, we discuss the issue of publication bias. We discuss issues like: Do we learn anything from null results, given the current state of research practices? Is poorly done research still worth sharing with the scientific community? And how can we move toward a system where null results are informative and worth publishing?   Shownotes Bones, A. K. (2012). We Knew the Future All Along Scientific Hypothesizing is Much More Accurate Than Other Forms of Precognition—A Satire in One Part. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3), 307–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612441216 Carter, E. C., & McCullough, M. E. (2014). Publication bias and the limited strength model of self-control: Has the evidence for ego depletion been overestimated? Frontiers in Psychology, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00823 Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076157 Fidler, F., Singleton Thorn, F., Barnett, A., Kambouris, S., & Kruger, A. (2018). The epistemic importance of establishing the absence of an effect. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(2), 237-244. Pickett, J. T., & Roche, S. P. (2017). Questionable, Objectionable or Criminal? Public Opinion on Data Fraud and Selective Reporting in Science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9886-2 Scheel, A. M., Schijen, M. R. M. J., & Lakens, D. (2021). An Excess of Positive Results: Comparing the Standard Psychology Literature With Registered Reports. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(2), 25152459211007468. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459211007467 Sterling, T. D. (1959). Publication Decisions and Their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance—Or Vice Versa. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 54(285), 30–34. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2282137 The FDA Trial tracker to see which trials have not shared their results: https://fdaaa.trialstracker.net/   

Heute geht es um Städtereisen mit Kindern mit dem Camper. Gehen Städtereisen überhaupt als Familien? Und dann auch noch mit Wohnwagen, Wohnwagen oder Zelt? Wo ist ein toller Campingplatz in Hamburg? Was muss ich bei einer Familienreise mit Ziel Berlin beachten und was sind die Reisetipps für einen Campingurlaub in München oder Paris? Antworten auf diese Fragen und zu vielen weiteren Themen rund um das Thema Campingurlaub und Städtereise mit Familien gibt es hier zu hören. Also lehnt euch zurück und macht euch bereit für eine neue spannende Folge eures Lieblingspodcasts. Hamburg Elbe Camp https://elbecamp.de/ Campingplatz Buchholz https://camping-buchholz.de/ Knaus Camping https://www.knauscamp.de/hamburg.html Tante Henni https://www.tante-henni.de/ Stover Strand https://www.camping-stover-strand.de/ Südseecamp https://www.suedsee-camp.de/ König der Löwen Musical Hafenrundfahrt HVV Berlin Marhlower See https://www.camping-bei-berlin.de/ Sanssouci Camping https://camping-potsdam.de/ Riegelspitze Camping http://www.campingplatz-riegelspitze.de/ Wohnmobil Oase https://wohnmobiloase.com/ Potsdam Camping https://www.berlin-potsdam-camping.de/ Tropical Island https://www.tropical-islands.de/ Camper Clan DMax Park am Gleisdreiecke Potsdamer Schloss Tempelhofer Feld Tiergarten Zoo Grunewald Bootsfahrt Spree Teufelsberg Deutsches Museum Amsterdam gegenüber vom Hauptbahnhof: Botel Amsterdam Camping Gaasper https://www.gaaspercamping.nl/de/ Vliehchenbos https://www.amsterdam.nl/vliegenbos/ Mini Camping Het Eulenstieken Duincamping de Lakens https://www.campingdelakens.de/ Anne Frank Haus Zoo Grachtenfahrt Nemo Museum Gewächshaus zum Essen Sushi Hauptbahnhof München Alianz Arena Camping Thalkirchen https://campingplatz-thalkirchen.de/ Camping Pilsensee https://www.camping-pilsensee.de/der-campingplatz/ Camping Nordwest https://campingplatz-nord-west.de/ Legoland Campingplatz https://www.legoland.de/ Dicke Mann Gasthaus Olympia Dorf Englischer Garten Viktualienmarkt Tierpark Heilbrunn Tierpark Pony Therme Erding Paris Sandaya Camping Paradies https://www.sandaya.de/unsere-campingplaetze/paris-maisons-laffitte Camping Caravaning des 4 vents Disneyland https://www.caravaning-4vents.fr/campingplatz-paris-frankreich Passende Sendungen: Ladybug Miraculous, Aristocats Aquarium Bootsfahrt Seine Fahrradtour Open Air Kinos Parque de la Viette Wasserspielplatz Jardin d'Acclimatation Eifelturm metro 6 Louvre Montmartre Bremen Steller See Universum Museum Bremer Stadtmusikanten Schnoor Schlachte Dresden Camping LuxOase https://www.luxoase.de/ Bamberg Campingplatz Insel https://www.campinginsel.de/ Kopenhagen DCU Camping Nörum https://www.dcu.dk/de/dcu-camping/kopenhagen-absalon Rothenburg ob der Tauber Mohrenhof Franken https://www.mohrenhof-franken.de/ Stadtführung https://www.rothenburg-tourismus.de/planen-buchen/gaestefuehrungen/schueler-jugendgruppen/ *** Instagram *** Folgt dem Camping Kinder Podcast auch auf Instagram @campingkinder_podcast und bleibt auf dem Laufenden! Hier posten wir immer Inhalte passend zu den aktuellen Folgen: https://instagram.com/campingkinder_podcast Eva findest Du auf Instagram unter @czamping und Inke unter @luftschloss_liebe Außerdem sind wir auch bei Facebook, Youtube und TikTok vertreten :-) Schaut einfach mal vorbei *** Werbung *** Ihr möchtet mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren und uns vielleicht unterstützen? Hier findet ihr alle Infos & Rabatte: https://linktr.ee/campingkinder_podcast?fbclid=PAAaY08mQdEt3TGrey4ejZfAvJSaxPQ2MwL59twpgbR0lhe5HIoQMfs7ufS9c Die Zeltkinder Community findet Ihr unter www.zeltkinder.de oder auf Instagram und Facebook

We chatted with Professor Daniël Lakens from TU Eindhoven about his recent proposal for universities to require scientists to submit their proposed research to methodological review boards before data collection. Read Daniël's proposal hereAnd check out the recent PNAS on the surprising generalizability of results from non-representative samples here

Bis zum Scheitel tätowiert, Follower ohne Ende und unfassbar reich. Vom Bordstein zur Skyline in Jogginghose. Rapper und Rapperinnen blockieren oft mit mehreren Tracks gleichzeitig die ersten Plätze der Charts, ohne sich je durch musikalische Früherziehung oder Blockflötenunterricht gequält zu haben. Backfisch auf Packtisch reimen, das kann doch nicht so schwer sein. Mithilfe von 3 Flexpert*innen versuchen Anne und Steffi, rappen zu lernen (ohne sich komplett zum Löffel zu machen). Rote Mütze Raphi ist gerade 22 geworden und ist mithilfe von TikTok und Instagram innerhalb eines halben Jahres auf den Playlisten sämtlicher Radiostationen gelandet. König Boris hat 30 Jahre Fettes-Brot-Erfahrung. Im Flexikon zerlegt er sein Songwriting in seine Einzelteile: Irgendwo zwischen Bauchgefühl, Lebensaufgabe und Technik. Taby Pilgrim ist Synchronsprecherin und Rapperin und für das Flexikon-Intro verantwortlich. Sie erklärt, was ein guter Reim ist, wie der Flow entsteht und wie man seine Brand findet. Und am Ende schreibt sie mit Anne und Steffi einen Rap. Rappy End! ;) Hörspieltipp "DreamLab": https://www.ardaudiothek.de/sendung/dreamlab-ein-ndr-fiction-podcast/12186163/ Text von Steffis Bettenrap: Ich traf dieses Mädchen von Hallig Hooge / Wir hatten Kontakt, richtig analogen / Doch leider hat sie mich schamlos belogen / Ihr Etagenbett war nicht frisch bezogen / Frottee und Biber, meine Einstiegsdrogen / In Satin hat sie tatsächlich blankgezogen / Leider hatte sie's nicht so mit Dialogen / An nächsten Morgen war sie wieder ausgeflogen / Ich will es frisch bezogen / Obwohl ich weg bin von Drogen / Hab ich mich verhoben / Vom Spannen des Lakens im Kreuz – bin ich ganz verbogen / Ich muss mich selber loben / Kam grad vom Urologen / Der fand sowas wie Rogen / Und trotzdem hab ichs geschafft – das Bett frisch bezogen Songtext "10 von 10": Er ist ne 10 von 10, aber macht Veganerwitze / Eine 10 von 10, aber hat ne Kabelkiste / Er ist ne 10 von 10, aber hat ‘nen Spitznamen für sein Glied / Fragst du „welche Mukke hörst du“, sagt er „alles irgendwie“ / Er ist ne 10 von 10, aber findet deine Jokes nicht witzig / Und sein Lieblingsbuch ist von Sebastian Fitzek / Er ist ne 10 von 10, doch hat einen Gamingstuhl / Oder er ist mit Victim Blaming cool / Er ist ne 10 von 10, aber ich verbrenne sein Picture / Denn er folgt dem Wendler bei Insta / Er ist ne 10 von 10, doch er hört gern Lanz und Precht / Manchmal ist das Leben ganz schön ungerecht / Sie ist ne 10 von 10, aber ihr Klopapier / Hängt verkehrt rum an der Wand, und ich kollabier / Er ist ne 10 von 10, aber spricht Vanille Vanillje aus / Und Zucchini Zutschini, schmeiß ihn doch bitte raus / Sie ist ne 10 von 10 aber hat das iPhone auf light mode/ Kann einem nur leid tun, Karma wird dich einholen / Er ist ne 10 von 10, doch schert sich nicht um Arterhaltung / Sie ist ne 8 von 10, denn sie spielt mit Erwartungshaltung / Er ist ne 10 von 10, doch kauft die BILD Zeitung am Stand ein / keine Punchline / Sie ist ne 10 von 10, aber sie hasst diesen Joke / Sie bleibt ne 10 von 10, denn ich hass diesen Joke / Er ist ne 10 von 10, denn er ist Feminist / ne 10 von 10, denn er ist genau wie ich

Celem odcinka jest omówienie potencjalnych skutków ubocznych wdrażania praktyk otwartej nauki w życie. Przedstawimy kwestie związane z rytualizacją i moralizacją tych praktyk. Omówimy także konsekwencje stosowania nowych standardów metodologicznych i statystycznych dla nierówności w nauce i wielkości uzyskiwanych efektów. Gospodarzami podcastu są dr Katarzyna Jaśko (Uniwersytet Jagielloński) oraz dr Bartosz Janik (Uniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach). Dofinansowano z programu „Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki” Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego w ramach projektu „Otwarta Nauka w Centrum Kopernika”. Literatura i linki: Claesen, A., Gomes, S., Tuerlinckx, F., & Vanpaemel, W. (2021). Comparing dream to reality: an assessment of adherence of the first generation of preregistered studies. Royal Society Open Science, 8(10), 211037. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.211037 Primbs, M. A., Pennington, C. R., Lakens, D., Silan, M. A. A., Lieck, D. S., Forscher, P. S., ... & Westwood, S. J. (2022). Are Small Effects the Indispensable Foundation for a Cumulative Psychological Science? A Reply to Götz et al.(2022). Perspectives on Psychological Science. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36126652/ Wilson, B. M., Harris, C. R., & Wixted, J. T. (2022). Theoretical false positive psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1-25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35501547/ Wilson, B. M., Harris, C. R., & Wixted, J. T. (2020). Science is not a signal detection problem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(11), 5559-5567. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1914237117 Corker, K. (2019). Open Science is a Behavior. https://www.cos.io/blog/open-science-is-a-behavior Pojęcie „otwartej nauki” przywoływane jest nieustannie w aktualnych dyskusjach toczonych w środowisku naukowym. Rozumie się przez nie otwarty (nieodpłatny i nieograniczony czasowo ani terytorialnie) dostęp do publikacji naukowych, a także udostępnianie przez naukowców zarówno wyników badań, jak i zgromadzonych danych oraz algorytmów wykorzystanych do ich przetwarzania. Celem postulowanych przez zwolenników „otwartej nauki” praktyk i rozwiązań jest zwiększenie przejrzystości całego procesu prowadzenia badań naukowych i publikacji ich wyników, unikanie patologii (takich jak oszustwa naukowe) i zwiększenie społecznego zaufania do nauki. Postulaty te wyłoniły się m.in. w odpowiedzi na kryzys replikacyjny, który obejmuje coraz większą liczbę dyscyplin naukowych, wstrząsa podstawami naszej wiedzy i podkopuje społeczne zaufanie do samej nauki. Nie mamy wątpliwości, że nauka odpowiedzialna społecznie musi spełniać kryteria “otwartej nauki”. Słuchaj nas także w: https://open.spotify.com/show/6NGqEBjecA1J0SXx6tdYw8 https://radiopublic.com/granice-nauki-WYYdZr https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy9kMmQzOWI0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/granice-nauki/id1475638662?uo=4 https://anchor.fm/copernicus-center

This weeks episode the gals recap Lakens birthday weekend and all the fun shenanigans they got into which included trivia (which they won!) and playing sex toy bingo. It's closing in on the start of Laken, Sarah, and Kasey's friendship and they go over some of the signs that your group of friends are in it for the long haul.

Joseph chats with Anne Scheel. Anne is currently a postdoc at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam but will be starting as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Methodology and Statistics at Utrecht University in mid October. Anne is a meta-scientist who is interested in which research and publication practices can improve the reproducibility of the published literature, and how researchers can be encouraged to design more falsifiable and informative studies. She did her PhD at Eindhoven University of Technology, followed by a postdoc project at VU Amsterdam and CWTS Leiden. In this episode we chat about her recent publications in which she argues that most claims in the psychology literature are so critically underspecified that attempts to empirically evaluate them are doomed to failure. She also argues that researchers should focus more on non-confirmatory research activities to obtain the inputs necessary to make hypothesis tests informative.WE NOW HAVE A SUBSTACK! Stay up to date with the pod and become part of the ever-growing community :) https://stanfordpsypod.substack.com/If you found this episode interesting at all, consider leaving us a good rating! It just takes a second but will allow us to reach more people and make them excited about psychology.LinksAnne's papers:Scheel, A. M. (2022). Why most psychological research findings are not even wrong. Infant and Child Development, 31(1), e2295Scheel, A. M., Tiokhin, L., Isager, P. M., & Lakens, D. (2021). Why hypothesis testers should spend less time testing hypotheses. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 744-755Paper on strategic ambiguity: Frankenhuis, W., Panchanathan, K., & Smaldino, P. E. (2022). Strategic ambiguity in the social sciencesAnne's Twitter @annemscheelAnne's blog 100% CIJoseph's Twitter @outa_josephPodcast Twitter @StanfordPsyPodPodcast Substack https://stanfordpsypod.substack.com/Let us know what you thought of this episode, or of the podcast! :) stanfordpsychpodcast@gmail.com

Daphne las de dagboeken van haar moeder. Maakt theater, een podcast: http://www.daphnegakes.com/tussendelakens en schreef dit boek: https://bit.ly/ikdaphne

Velen hebben niet geleerd hoe je een relatie moet onderhouden of hoe het nou precies moet tussen de lakens. We rommelen maar wat aan. Dat kan anders. In deze podcast vertel ik je hoe.

Hebben mannen echt meer zin dan vrouwen? Wist je dat vrouwen een ingebouwde penis hebben? Wat gaat er precies mis als je tijdens het vrijen stiekem in je hoofd een boodschappenlijstje voor morgen maakt? En wist je dat het goed is om seks in te plannen en dan achteraf nog een appje te sturen? Nou, ik zat spreekwoordelijk met mijn oren te klapperen tijdens dit tweede gesprek met seksuoloog Astrid Kremers, waarin ze goede oplossingen geeft voor een probleem waar jij misschien mee zit...   Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hannelore vindt het moeilijk om over seks te praten, maar het is wèl een belangrijk onderwerp. Dus besloot ze tegenover de bekende seksuoloog Astrid Kremers volkomen open en eerlijk te zijn, in de hoop haar de beste tips te ontfutselen om het vuurtje thuis weer goed op te stoken. En dat is ook wel nodig, als je al 25 jaar met dezelfde man in bed ligt.  Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

To improve on peer review, social psychologist Daniël Lakens is subjecting research to a "red team" approach from software, where developers pay independent teams bounties to find bugs in their code. He even thinks red teaming your research could make communicating it easier by certifying its credibility.

Joe Hilgard is Assistant Professor of Social Psychology at Illinois State University. In this conversation, we discuss his work on detecting and reporting scientific fraud. BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith. New conversations every other Friday. You can find the podcast on all podcasting platforms (e.g., Spotify, Apple/Google Podcasts, etc.).Timestamps0:00:05: Are we only catching the dumb fraudsters?0:08:45: Why does Joe always sign his peer reviews?0:11:51: Detecting errors during peer review0:17:44: Retractions motivated by Joe's work0:22:19: The whole Zhang affair0:49:19: Ben found errors in a paper. Joe advises what to do next1:04:06: How to separate negligible errors from serious errors that require action1:11:37: When effects are too big to be truePodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastJoe's linksWebsite: http://crystalprisonzone.blogspot.com/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=FPOHtgQAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/JoeHilgardBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJReferencesBrown, N. J., & Heathers, J. A. (2017). The GRIM test: A simple technique detects numerous anomalies in the reporting of results in psychology. Social Psychological and Personality Science.Callaway, E. (2011). Report finds massive fraud at Dutch universities. Nature News.Friston, K. (2012). Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers. Neuroimage.Heathers, J. A., Anaya, J., van der Zee, T., & Brown, N. J. (2018). Recovering data from summary statistics: Sample parameter reconstruction via iterative techniques (SPRITE) . PeerJ Preprints.Hilgard, Joe's blog post about the Zhang affair: http://crystalprisonzone.blogspot.com/2021/01/i-tried-to-report-scientific-misconduct.htmlHilgard, J. (2021). Maximal positive controls: A method for estimating the largest plausible effect size. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.Hilgard, J. (2019). Comment on Yoon and Vargas (2014): An implausibly large effect from implausibly invariant data. Psychological Science.Lakens, Daniel: blog post on hungry judges: http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-judges.htmlMorey, R. D., Chambers, C. D., ... & Zwaan, R. A. (2016). The Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative. Royal Society Open Science.O'Grady: Write up in Science Magazine about the Zhang affair: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6531/767Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2013). Life after p-hacking. In Meeting of the society for personality and social psychology, New Orleans, LA.Simmons, J. What do true findings look like: Presentation slides available at https://osf.io/93fkq/Stapel's autobiography freely available in English: http://nick.brown.free.fr/stapelYong, E. (2012). The data detective. Nature News.

What's wrong with the social sciences? In this episode, Massimo and Julia are joined by Professor Daniel Lakens from the Eindhoven University of Technology, who studies psychology and blogs about research methods and open science. The three discuss why so many psychology papers can't be trusted, and what solutions might exist for the problem (including how to fix the skewed incentives in the field). Sped up the speakers by ['1.13', '1.0']

Niet in volgorde van verschijnen: eerste rijles I flanellen lakens I gescheurde briefjes van vijf I mislukte bivak I muggen I nagelbijten I paarden I reizen

This week, we talk to Anne Scheel, a doctoral candidate at the Eindhoven University of Technology, about her upcoming paper Why Hypothesis Testers Should Spend Less Time Testing Hypotheses.Scheel, A.M., Tiokhin L., Isager, P.M., & Lakens, D. (in press). Why hypothesis testers should spend less time testing hypotheses. Perspectives on Psychological Science. https://psyarxiv.com/vekpu/Kama Muta (a Sanskrit word!)Open-access versions of all papers (including the book chapter) on the website: kamamutalab.orgAnne's recommendation for a good place to start:Fiske, A. P., Seibt, B., & Schubert, T. (2019). The Sudden Devotion Emotion: Kama Muta and the Cultural Practices Whose Function Is to Evoke It. Emotion Review, 11(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073917723167Fiske, A. P., Schubert, T., & Seibt, B. (2017). ‘Kama muta’ or ‘being moved by love’: A bootstrapping approach to the ontology and epistemology of an emotion. In J. L. Cassaniti & U. Menon (Eds.), Universalism Without Uniformity: Explorations in Mind and Culture (pp. 79–100). University of Chicago Press. https://repositorio.iscte-iul.pt/handle/10071/16322

On our first guest episode, we talk to our first (and only) fan, Daniël Lakens, an experimental psychologist at Eindhoven University of Technology. We talk about power analyses, sample size justification, SESOI, statistical 'heuristics,' and the broader culture in psychological science. Inspired by a twitter post by Josh Grubbs: https://twitter.com/JoshuaGrubbsPhD/status/1290652864415707139Daniël Lakens's blog, The 20% Statistician: https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/

Ein Kommentar von Rüdiger Lenz. Der Gebrauch der Vernunft ist für die Menschheit noch zu unvollkommen, um die Gesetze des Unbewussten enthüllen zu können und besonders, um es zu ersetzen. Der Anteil des Unbewussten an unseren Handlungen ist ungeheuer und der Anteil der Vernunft sehr klein. Gustave Le Bon Klassenkampf statt Querfront Ein großes Laken wurde entfaltet, auf dem stand groß und fett zu lesen: Klassenkampf statt Querfront, kurz nach dem ein Anschlag auf den Verleger und Friedensaktivisten Ken Jebsen verübt wurde. Wahrscheinlich waren die Frau und der Mann, die zusammen den Anschlag verübten, Mitglieder der Antifa oder einer anderen linksextremen Gruppierung, wie die Aufschrift ihres Lakens zeigte. Ja, Querfront, das sind die anderen, die Feinde, und der Klassenkampf, das betrifft uns, die unterdrückten Lohnempfänger, mögen sie denken. Doch ist den meisten Menschen nicht bekannt, was Kampf überhaupt ist, was er bedeutet, wenn der heutige Mensch ihn im Kontext irgendeiner Partei, einer Idee, oder schlichtweg für seine guten Ziele einsetzt. Ich werde hier die These aufstellen, dass der Kampf, in Form einer Gewaltabsicht und oder einer Verdrängung von Personen zu einem Gegenüber, oft auch gegen sich selbst - was er im Grunde immer ist, eher innere Motive der Kämpfer offenlegt, als dass ein solcher Kampf auch nur irgendetwas mit einer guten Tat mittels Kampf zu tun hat. Kampf ist immer ein Überträger, ein Mittler von Gewalt- und Unterdrückungsabsichten. Gleichfalls werde ich hier darlegen, dass sich der Begründer der Klassenkampf-These, Karl Marx, ganz gründlich geirrt hat dabei, dazu aufzurufen, dass man mittels eines Kampfes der Klassen vom einfachen Arbeiter nach ganz oben in die Regierungsführung gelangen kann, ohne dabei selbst zum Massentäter zu werden. Natürlich kann man sich bei einem solchen Kampf einbilden, man könne über Leichen gehen, ohne diese Leichen dabei zu bemerken oder sie als notwendiges Übel für die gute Sache abzutun. Lenin und Trotzki waren in diesem Sinn Massenmörder im Auftrag ihrer Definitionen vom Sieg des Proletariats. Schaut man aber näher und tiefer in deren Verhalten hinein, entpuppen sich beide als Nutzer der damaligen Revolution, um ihre jeweils innere Gestörtheit in die Welt hineinzuprojizieren. Aber das will ich hier nur kurz erwähnen und nicht tiefer darlegen...weiterlesen hier: https://kenfm.de/demokratie-statt-kampf-oder-marx-irrtum-von-ruediger-lenz/ Den vollständigen Tagesdosis-Text (inkl ggf. Quellenhinweisen und Links) findet ihr hier: https://kenfm.de/demokratie-statt-kampf-oder-marx-irrtum-von-ruediger-lenz/ Jetzt KenFM unterstützen: https://www.patreon.com/KenFMde KenFM bemüht sich um ein breites Meinungsspektrum. Meinungsartikel und Gastbeiträge müssen nicht die Sichtweise der Redaktion widerspiegeln. Alle weiteren Beiträge aus der Rubrik „Tagesdosis“ findest Du auf unserer Homepage: https://kenfm.de/tagesdosis/ Jetzt KenFM unterstützen: https://www.patreon.com/KenFMde https://de.tipeee.com/kenfm https://flattr.com/@KenFM Dir gefällt unser Programm? Informationen zu weiteren Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten hier: https://kenfm.de/support/kenfm-unterstuetzen/ Du kannst uns auch mit Bitcoins unterstützen. BitCoin-Adresse: 18FpEnH1Dh83GXXGpRNqSoW5TL1z1PZgZK Abonniere jetzt den KenFM-Newsletter: https://kenfm.de/newsletter/ KenFM ist auch als kostenlose App für Android- und iOS-Geräte verfügbar! Über unsere Homepage kommst Du zu den Stores von Apple und Google. Hier der Link: https://kenfm.de/kenfm-app/ https://www.kenfm.de https://www.twitter.com/TeamKenFM https://www.instagram.com/kenfm.de/ https://www.youtube.com/KenFM https://soundcloud.com/ken-fm See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

How do you design a good experimental study? How do you even know that you’re asking a good research question? Moreover, how can you align funding and publishing incentives with the principles of an open source science? Let’s do another “big picture” episode to try and answer these questions! You know, these episodes that I want to do from time to time, with people who are not from the Bayesian world, to see what good practices there are out there. The first one, episode 15, was focused on programming and python, thanks to Michael Kennedy. In this one, you’ll meet Daniel Lakens. Daniel is an experimental psychologist at the Human-Technology Interaction group at Eindhoven University of Technology, in the Netherlands. He’s worked there since 2010, when he received his PhD in social psychology. His research focuses on how to design and interpret studies, applied meta-statistics, and reward structures in science. Daniel loves teaching about research methods and about how to ask good research questions. He even crafted free Coursera courses about these topics. A fervent advocate of open science, he prioritizes scholar articles review requests based on how much the articles adhere to Open Science principles. On his blog, he describes himself as ‘the 20% Statistician’. Why? Well, he’ll tell you in the episode… Our theme music is « Good Bayesian », by Baba Brinkman (feat MC Lars and Mega Ran). Check out his awesome work at https://bababrinkman.com/ ! Links from the show: Daniel's website: https://sites.google.com/site/lakens2/Home The 20% Statistician: http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/ Daniel on GitHub: https://github.com/Lakens Daniel on Twitter: https://twitter.com/lakens Daniel on Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=ZbqYyrsAAAAJ&hl=nl Coursera Course -- Improving your statistical inferences: https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Coursera Course -- Improving Your Statistical Questions: https://www.coursera.org/learn/improving-statistical-questions Peer Reviewers' Openness Initiative: https://opennessinitiative.org/ The Scientific Paper Is Obsolete -- Here’s what’s next: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/04/the-scientific-paper-is-obsolete/556676/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/learn-bayes-stats/message

Are decisions made by scientists one century ago still with us and weigh down science? One decision involves the rules scientists play by when it comes to statistical significance, and more specifically, the rule that results fall below a .05 threshold to count as significant. The point of this threshold is to help minimize false positives. But .05 is consistent with at least 33% of results being false...or worse! Links and Resources * Edouard Machery (https://www.edouardmachery.com/) * The paper (https://imai.fas.harvard.edu/research/files/significance.pdf) * What a nerdy debate about p-values shows about science — and how to fix it (https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/7/31/16021654/p-values-statistical-significance-redefine-0005) * The Alpha War by Edouard Machery (https://osf.io/7uh8a/) * Justify your Alpha by Lakens et al. (https://psyarxiv.com/9s3y6/) * Should We Redefine Statistical Significance? A Brains Blog Roundtable (http://philosophyofbrains.com/2017/10/02/should-we-redefine-statistical-significance-a-brains-blog-roundtable.aspx) * Abandon Statistical Signifcance by McShane et al. (http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/abandon.pdf) Paper Quotes "Ronald Fisher understood that the choice of 0.05 was arbitrary when he introduced it. Since then, theory and empirical evidence have demonstrated that a lower threshold is needed. A much larger pool of scientists are now asking a much larger number of questions, possibly with much lower prior odds of success. For research communities that continue to rely on null hypothesis significance testing, reducing the P value threshold for claims of new discoveries to 0.005 is an actionable step that will immediately improve reproducibility." Special Guest: Edouard Machery.

Over witte lakens gesprokenInmiddels zijn wij bij het laatste vers van Psalm 119 gekomen waarin de schrijver van de psalm zegt:Ik heb gedwaald als een verloren schaap; zoek Uw dienaarMet andere woorden erkent de schrijver van de psalm dat hij op de verkeerde weg zat en hij vraagt God om hem op te zoeken.Lees meer...Support the show (https://radioisrael.nl/geven/)

To celebrate our 100th episode, which we video-streamed live, Dan and James were joined by three special guests: Daniel Lakens, Amy Orben, and Chris Chambers. Here's what they covered in this episode: James and Dan share their favourite episodes The power of the Twitter direct message Daniel Lakens joins us to discuss his recent work on helping people make better statistical decisions Can you create cross-discipline effect size guidelines? What would Jacob Cohen say if we could bring him back to life? Academic backup career plans Our new partnership with Prolific James' piece on not treating your research participants like cattle (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/stop-treating-your-experimental-participants-like-cattle-b5fab7fbfca7) Amy Orben joins us to discuss multiverse analysis and the Reproducibilitea community The Latin Modern Roman font (https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/latin-modern-roman) We speak with Chris Chambers and get an update of what's happening with Registered reports Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) This episode was brought you by Prolific (https://www.prolific.co/everythinghertz), who is giving away $50 to podcast listeners who want to give online sampling a go! Redeem the free credit here: https://www.prolific.co/everythinghertz Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Special Guests: Amy Orben, Chris Chambers, and Daniel Lakens.

De oorlog in Syrië is een wespennest met uiteenlopende spelers, maar allemaal moeten ze rekening houden met Moskou. En Moskou vult maar al te graag het gat dat de Amerikanen hebben laten vallen. Ook in andere landen in het Midden-Oosten is Rusland hard bezig om Amerika als belangrijke spelverdeler te vervangen. Zelfs hele traditionele bondgenoten van de VS flirten nu openlijk met Poetin. In onze geopolitieke rubriek ‘het Geobureau’ hierover Ruslandkenner Hubert Smeets van Raam op Rusland en Goos Hofstee, Midden-Oostendeskundige van Instituut Clingendael.

Het bericht Podcast – Hoe word je een Godin tussen de lakens? verscheen eerst op SheSenses.

SpecialiTea episode 5 – Peder Isager We get talking to Peder Isager about his PhD work, equivalence testing, and the psychological science accelerator. You can find Peder on twitter (@peder_isager); he also has a website https://pedermisager.netlify.com/ Some Equivalence testing resources: “Equivalence Testing for Psychological Research: A Tutorial” from Lakens, Scheel, and Isager http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2515245918770963 “TOST equivalence testing R package (TOSTER) and spreadsheet” http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2016/12/tost-equivalence-testing-r-package.html The psychological science accelerator: The website https://psysciacc.org/ Twitter @PsySciAcc Pangea – Jake Westfall: the paper (http://jakewestfall.org/publications/pangea.pdf), and the shiny app (https://jakewestfall.shinyapps.io/pangea/) Music credit: Be Jammin – Alexander Nakarada freepd.com/world.php

Opschudding in de wetenschappelijke wereld. Drie onderzoekers hebben het voor elkaar gekregen om nep-artikelen in wetenschappelijke tijdschriften te publiceren. En zij claimen nu dat de wetenschap corrupt is. Dat ligt toch iets genuanceerder, meent Daniël Lakens. Hij is universitair docent aan de Technische universiteit Eindhoven en wil de wetenschap betrouwbaarder maken.

Diederik Stapel zoog onderzoeksresultaten uit zijn duim. De Amerikaanse voedingspsycholoog Brian Wansink verloor onlangs zijn hoogleraarschap omdat hij goochelde met getallen. En gisteren kondigde de universiteit Tilburg een onderzoek aan naar een omstreden promotie naar salafisme. Het doet het vertrouwen in de wetenschap geen goed, dit soort zaken. Vanaf aanstaande maandag is er nu een nieuwe versie van de integriteitscode voor wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Wij praten erover met Daniël Lakens, psycholoog en universitair docent aan de Universiteit Eindhoven. Hij zet zich in voor betrouwbaarder onderzoek en geeft les over deze code.

Armen spreekt verder met psycholoog Daniël Lakens over de replicatiecrisis in de wetenschap en over de financiering van wetenschappelijk onderzoek in Nederland. Onderwerpen die in dit tweede deel aan bod komen zijn o.a. de Open Science Collaboration waar Daniël onderdeel van uitmaakt (3:40), de replicatie van Armen's eigen onderzoek door anderen (13:00), de schaduwzijde van de replicatierevolutie (20:20) en hoe onderzoeksgelden in Nederland verdeeld worden en hoe dat beter kan (30:42).

'Nederlandse academici ook in neptijdschriften', kopte de Volkskrant vanmorgen op de voorpagina. Honderden onderzoekers publiceerden hun werk in tijdschriften met een twijfelachtige reputatie. Hoe kán dat? Wij praten erover met Daniël Lakens. Hij is universitair docent aan de Technische universiteit Eindhoven en wil de wetenschap betrouwbaarder maken.

Daniël Lakens is een van de meest uitgesproken figuren in de replicatiebeweging in de wetenschap. In dit eerste deel komen we te spreken over Diederik Stapel, of Daniël wel eens zijn eigen werk heeft gerepliceerd (14:57), Publicatiebias (20:04), het bekendste geval van wetenschappelijke fraude in de politicologie van de afgelopen jaren (30:01), p-waardes en 'p-hacking' (39:55) en het ontstaan van de replicatiebeweging in de psychologie (49:00).

Wetenschappers beconcurreren elkaar steeds harder om geld, toppublicaties en aanzien. Is het systeem van de wetenschap nog wel houdbaar? Daniël Lakens kijkt hoe het beter kan: hij bestudeert de wetenschap ‘op wetenschappelijke wijze’. Waarom werken wetenschappers zo en is dat eigenlijk logisch? Lieven Scheire gaat in gesprek met Daniel over zijn ideeën voor alternatieven voor de manier van publiceren, en hoe de wetenschap transparanter kan worden. Ook praten ze over het afnemende vertrouwen van het publiek in de wetenschap: wat zouden wetenschappers én journalisten kunnen doen om het imago van de wetenschap te verbeteren?

We talked to Daniel Lakens, assistant professor in Applied Cognitive Psychology at Eindhoven University of Technology, and author of the blog 'The 20% Statistician'. In 2017, he recieved the Leamer-Rosenthal prize for Open Social Science as a Leader in Education. He believes science should be a much more collaborative enterprise A shorter version of this interview was used in the second episode, "Collaboration is Key" (https://soundcloud.com/utrechtyoungacademy/the-road-to-open-science-ep-2-collaboration-is-key). The other guests of episode 2 are Kirstie Whitaker, Anita Eerland and Loek Brinkman. All the show-notes and discussion about that episode are available on openscience-utrecht.com/r2os-episode-2/. Follow @R2OSpodcast on twitter to stay up to date about the upcoming episodes.

Everybody's talking about p-values. An important part of the replicability discussion has been about the correct use and interpretation of p-values, and the potentially distorting incentives attached to getting one below .05. And recently, Simine was a co-author on a paper proposing to redefine the interpretive threshold for calling something "significant." In this episode we talk about p-values: our feelings about them, how we were taught to think about them and how that has changed over the years, and the role of thresholds and categorization of evidence in our scientific thinking. Plus: A letter-writer asks if you should put more faith in the "pre-crisis" early work of present-day open science advocates. Discussed in this episode: Shiny app showing the distribution of p-values, by Kristoffer Magnusson Redefine Statistical Significance by Benjamin et al. And the responses: Justify Your Alpha by Lakens et al., and Abandon Statistical Significance by McShane et al. The Black Goat is hosted by Sanjay Srivastava, Alexa Tullett, and Simine Vazire. Find us on the web at www.theblackgoatpodcast.com, on Twitter at @blackgoatpod, or on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. This is episode 22. It was recorded November 22, 2017.

In this episode, Dan and James welcome back Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) to discuss his new paper on justifying your alpha level. Highlights: Why did Daniel write this paper? Turning away from mindless statistics Incremental vs. seismic change in statistical practice The limitations to justifying your alpha The benefits of registered reports Daniel’s coursera course What’s better? Two pre-registered studies at .05 or one unregistered study at .005? Testing at the start of semester vs. the end of semester Thinking of controlling for Type 1 errors as driving speed limits Error rates mean different things between fields What if we applied the “5 Sigma” threshold used in physics to the biobehavioral sciences? What about abandoning statistical significance How did Daniel co-ordinate a paper with 88 co-authors? Using time zones to your benefit when collaborating How can junior researchers contribute to these types of discussions? Science by discussion, not manifesto The dangers of blanket recommendations How do you actually justify your alpha from scratch? Links Daniel on Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/lakens Daniel’s courser course - https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Justify your alpha paper - https://psyarxiv.com/9s3y6 Abandon statistical significance - https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07588 Using the costs of error rates to set your alpha - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00625.x Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) joins James and Dan to talk meta-analysis. Here’s what they cover: Daniel’s opinion on the current state of meta-analysis The benefit of reporting guidelines (even though hardly anyone actually follows them) How fixing publication bias can fix science Meta-analysis before and after that Bem paper How to correct for publication bias Whether meta-analyses are just published for the citations The benefits of pre-registering meta-analysis How we get people to share their data How sharing data doesn’t just benefit others - it also helps you replicate your own analyses later Success is tied to funding, no matter how “cheap” your research is How people can say “yes” to cumulative science, but “no” to sharing data Responding to mistakes How to find errors in your own papers before submission We ask Daniel: i) If he could should one slide to every introductory psychology lecture in the world, what would say?, ii) What has he changed his mind about in the last few years?, iii) The one book/paper he thinks everyone should read Daniel also gives James and Dan ideas for their 50th episode Links Daniel on Twitter - @lakens Daniel’s course - www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Daniel’s blog - daniellakens.blogspot.no Daniel’s recommended book - Understanding Psychology as a science https://he.palgrave.com/page/detail/?sf1=barcode&st1=9780230542303 Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) drops in to talk statistical inference with James and Dan. Here’s what they cover: How did Daniel get into statistical inference? Are we overdoing the Frequentist vs. Bayes debate? What situations better suit Bayesian inference? The over advertising of Bayesian inference Study design is underrated The limits of p-values Why not report both p-values and Bayes factors? The “perfect t-test” script and the difference between Student’s and Welch’s t-tests The two-one sided test Frequentist and Bayesian approaches for stopping procedures Why James and Dan started the podcast The worst bits of advice that Daniel has heard about statistical inference Dan discuss a new preprint on Bayes factors in psychiatry Statistical power Excel isn’t all bad… The importance of accessible software We ask Daniel about his research workflow - how does he get stuff done? Using blog posts as a way of gauging interest in a topic Chris Chambers’ new book: The seven deadly sins of psychology Even more names for methodological terrorists Links Daniel on Twitter - @lakens Daniel’s course - https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Daniel’s blog - http://daniellakens.blogspot.no TOSTER - http://daniellakens.blogspot.no/2016/12/tost-equivalence-testing-r-package.html Dan’s preprint on Bayesian alternatives for psychiatry research - https://osf.io/sgpe9/ Understanding the new statistics - https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-New-Statistics-Meta-Analysis-Multivariate/dp/041587968X Daniel’s effect size paper - http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863/full The seven deadly sins of Psychology - http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10970.html Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

What's wrong with the social sciences? In this episode, Massimo and Julia are joined by Professor Daniel Lakens from the Eindhoven University of Technology, who studies psychology and blogs about research methods and open science. The three discuss why so many psychology papers can't be trusted, and what solutions might exist for the problem (including how to fix the skewed incentives in the field).