Podcast appearances and mentions of Simine Vazire

Probably not — the incentives are too strong. But a few reformers are trying. We check in on their progress, in an update to an episode originally published last year. (Part 2 of 2) SOURCES:Max Bazerman, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School.Leif Nelson, professor of business administration at the University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business.Brian Nosek, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia and executive director at the Center for Open Science.Ivan Oransky, distinguished journalist-in-residence at New York University, editor-in-chief of The Transmitter, and co-founder of Retraction Watch.Joseph Simmons, professor of applied statistics and operations, information, and decisions at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.Uri Simonsohn, professor of behavioral science at Esade Business School.Simine Vazire, professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne and editor-in-chief of Psychological Science. RESOURCES:"How a Scientific Dispute Spiralled Into a Defamation Lawsuit," by Gideon Lewis-Kraus (The New Yorker, 2024)."The Harvard Professor and the Bloggers," by Noam Scheiber (The New York Times, 2023)."They Studied Dishonesty. Was Their Work a Lie?" by Gideon Lewis-Kraus (The New Yorker, 2023)."Evolving Patterns of Extremely Productive Publishing Behavior Across Science," by John P.A. Ioannidis, Thomas A. Collins, and Jeroen Baas (bioRxiv, 2023)."Hindawi Reveals Process for Retracting More Than 8,000 Paper Mill Articles," (Retraction Watch, 2023)."Exclusive: Russian Site Says It Has Brokered Authorships for More Than 10,000 Researchers," (Retraction Watch, 2019)."How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data," by Daniele Fanelli (PLOS One, 2009).Lifecycle Journal. EXTRAS:"Why Is There So Much Fraud in Academia? (Update)" by Freakonomics Radio (2024)."Freakonomics Goes to College, Part 1," by Freakonomics Radio (2012).

Some of the biggest names in behavioral science stand accused of faking their results. Last year, an astonishing 10,000 research papers were retracted. In a series originally published in early 2024, we talk to whistleblowers, reformers, and a co-author who got caught up in the chaos. (Part 1 of 2) SOURCES:Max Bazerman, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School.Leif Nelson, professor of business administration at the University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business.Brian Nosek, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia and executive director at the Center for Open Science.Joseph Simmons, professor of applied statistics and operations, information, and decisions at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.Uri Simonsohn, professor of behavioral science at Esade Business School.Simine Vazire, professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne and editor-in-chief of Psychological Science. RESOURCES:"More Than 10,000 Research Papers Were Retracted in 2023 — a New Record," by Richard Van Noorden (Nature, 2023)."Data Falsificada (Part 1): 'Clusterfake,'" by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Data Colada, 2023)."Fabricated Data in Research About Honesty. You Can't Make This Stuff Up. Or, Can You?" by Nick Fountain, Jeff Guo, Keith Romer, and Emma Peaslee (Planet Money, 2023).Complicit: How We Enable the Unethical and How to Stop, by Max Bazerman (2022)."Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Field Experiment About Dishonesty," by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Data Colada, 2021)."False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant," by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Psychological Science, 2011). EXTRAS:"Why Do We Cheat, and Why Shouldn't We?" by No Stupid Questions (2023)."Is Everybody Cheating These Days?" by No Stupid Questions (2021).

Eugenie Reich is an attorney who defends scientific whistleblowers, and a former investigative science journalist. We talk about her previous work as a science journalist, in particular her book Plastic Fantastic about one of the biggest fraud cases in physics, the case of Jan-Hendrik Schön. We'd planned to also discuss Eugenie's current work as an attorney, but spent all our time on the Schön case. Eugenie kindly agreed to do another interview, in which we cover the legal aspects of fraud, which will be the next episode (#106).BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith.Support the show: https://geni.us/bjks-patreonTimestamps0:00:00: One of the biggest fraud cases in physics/all of science0:05:47: How and why Eugenie started writing about the Schön case0:09:26: Why did Schön commit fraud?0:19:30: Schön's PhD: he never saved any original data0:30:05: Bell Labs vs. Schön's PhD lab: long-term revolutions vs. short-term applications0:36:42: Schön's first work at Bell Labs was 'unpublishable'0:41:42: How to get away with fraud: pretend you collected data in another lab0:47:45: Bertram Batlogg and the role of the supervisors of fraudsters0:56:20: How the bursting of the Dot-Com Bubble and 9/11 may (indirectly) have exacerbated Schön's fraud1:01:09: How to use your colleagues' ideas to commit better fraud1:05:05: How Schön's fraud unraveled1:13:45: What is Schön doing now?1:18:11: A book or paper more people should read1:20:20: Something Eugenie wishes she'd learnt sooner1:22:58: Advice for PhD students/postdocsPodcast linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-podTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-pod-twtEugenie's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/reich-webTwitter: https://geni.us/reich-twtBen's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/bjks-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-twtReferences and linksEpisode with Simine Vazire: https://geni.us/bjks-vazireEpisode with Elisabeth Bik: https://geni.us/bjks-bikBell Labs (2002). The Schon report: https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170403_1709/misconduct-revew-report-lucent.pdfReich (2009). Plastic fantastic: How the biggest fraud in physics shook the scientific world.Shapin & Schaffer (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life.

Read the full transcript here. How much progress has psychology made on the things that matter most to us? What are some psychological findings we feel pretty confident are true? How much consensus is there about the Big 5 personality traits? What are the points of disagreement about the Big 5? Are traits the best way of thinking about personality? How consistent are the Big 5 traits across cultures? How accurately do people self-report their own personality? When are psychophysical measures more or less useful than self-report measures? How much credence should we lend to the concept of cognitive dissonance? What's the next phase of improvement in the social sciences? Has replicability improved among the social sciences in, say, the last decade? What percent of papers in top journals contain fraud? What percent of papers in top journals are likely unreplicable? Is it possible to set the bar for publishing too high? How can universities maintain a high level of quality in their professors and researchers without pressuring them so hard to publish constantly? What is the simpliest valid analysis for a given study?Simine Vazire's research examines whether and how science self-corrects, focusing on psychology. She studies the research methods and practices used in psychology, as well as structural systems in science, such as peer review. She also examines whether we know ourselves, and where our blind spots are in our self-knowledge. She teaches research methods. She is editor-in-chief of Psychological Science (as of 1 Jan, 2024) and co-founder (with Brian Nosek) of the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science. Learn more about her and her work at simine.com.Further reading:"How Replicable Are Links Between Personality Traits and Consequential Life Outcomes? The Life Outcomes of Personality Replication Project", by Christopher J. Soto"Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies", by Joel, Eastwick, Allison, and WolfNote from Spencer: I misremembered this study as trying to predict breakups when actually the variable they found they couldn't predict is change in relationship-quality over time. The authors said that "relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables". 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]

Probably not — the incentives are too strong. Scholarly publishing is a $28 billion global industry, with misconduct at every level. But a few reformers are gaining ground.   (Part 2 of 2) SOURCES:Max Bazerman, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School.Leif Nelson, professor of business administration at the University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business.Brian Nosek, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia and executive director at the Center for Open Science.Ivan Oransky, distinguished journalist-in-residence at New York University, editor-in-chief of The Transmitter, and co-founder of Retraction Watch.Joseph Simmons, professor of applied statistics and operations, information, and decisions at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.Uri Simonsohn, professor of behavioral science at Esade Business School.Simine Vazire, professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne and editor-in-chief of Psychological Science. RESOURCES:"The Harvard Professor and the Bloggers," by Noam Scheiber (The New York Times, 2023)."They Studied Dishonesty. Was Their Work a Lie?" by Gideon Lewis-Kraus (The New Yorker, 2023)."Evolving Patterns of Extremely Productive Publishing Behavior Across Science," by John P.A. Ioannidis, Thomas A. Collins, and Jeroen Baas (bioRxiv, 2023)."Hindawi Reveals Process for Retracting More Than 8,000 Paper Mill Articles," (Retraction Watch, 2023)."Exclusive: Russian Site Says It Has Brokered Authorships for More Than 10,000 Researchers," (Retraction Watch, 2019)."How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data," by Daniele Fanelli (PLOS One, 2009). EXTRAS:"Why Is There So Much Fraud in Academia?" by Freakonomics Radio (2024)."Freakonomics Goes to College, Part 1," by Freakonomics Radio (2012).

Some of the biggest names in behavioral science stand accused of faking their results. Last year, an astonishing 10,000 research papers were retracted. We talk to whistleblowers, reformers, and a co-author who got caught up in the chaos. (Part 1 of 2) SOURCES:Max Bazerman, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School.Leif Nelson, professor of business administration at the University of California, Berkeley Haas School of Business.Brian Nosek, professor of psychology at the University of Virginia and executive director at the Center for Open Science.Joseph Simmons, professor of applied statistics and operations, information, and decisions at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.Uri Simonsohn, professor of behavioral science at Esade Business School.Simine Vazire, professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne and editor-in-chief of Psychological Science. RESOURCES:"More Than 10,000 Research Papers Were Retracted in 2023 — a New Record," by Richard Van Noorden (Nature, 2023)."Data Falsificada (Part 1): 'Clusterfake,'" by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Data Colada, 2023)."Fabricated Data in Research About Honesty. You Can't Make This Stuff Up. Or, Can You?" by Nick Fountain, Jeff Guo, Keith Romer, and Emma Peaslee (Planet Money, 2023).Complicit: How We Enable the Unethical and How to Stop, by Max Bazerman (2022)."Evidence of Fraud in an Influential Field Experiment About Dishonesty," by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Data Colada, 2021)."False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant," by Joseph Simmons, Leif Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn (Psychological Science, 2011). EXTRAS:"Why Do We Cheat, and Why Shouldn't We?" by No Stupid Questions (2023)."Is Everybody Cheating These Days?" by No Stupid Questions (2021).

Under the Cortex biweekly hosts authors of peer-reviewed articles. In this week's episode, we do things a little differently, take a step back, and explore what happens on the editorial side of scientific publishing.  Simine Vazire, the incoming Editor-in-Chief of APS's journal Psychological Science, joined Özge Gürcanlı Fischer Baum to discuss her plans to further advance the practices of inclusivity in APS's flagship journal, she highlighted the current disadvantages in academic publishing in general and said that APS is a leader in  supporting psychological scientists. The conversation evolved into topics of writing in English as a borrowed language, hidden curriculum in publishing and constructive practices such as pre-registration and reporting conflict of interest. 

Simine Vazire is a Professor of Psychology at the University of Melbourne. In this conversation, we talk about her work on meta-science, the purpose of journals and peer review, Simine's plans for being Editor-in-Chief at Psychological Science, the hidden curriculum of scienitic publishing, and much more.BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith.Support the show: https://geni.us/bjks-patreonTimestamps0:00:00: What is SIPS and why did Simine cofound it?0:05:10: Why Simine resigned from the NASEM Reproducibility & Replicability committee0:13:07: Do we still need journals and peer review in 2023?0:28:04: What does an Editor-in-Chief actually do?0:37:09: Simine will be EiC of Psychological Science0:59:44: The 'hidden curriculum' of scientific publishing1:04:03: Why Siminie created a GoFundMe for DataColada1:15:10: A book or paper more people should read1:17:10: Something Simine wishes she'd learnt sooner1:18:44: Advice for PhD students and postdocsPodcast linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-podTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-pod-twtSimine's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/vazire-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/vazire-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/vazire-twtBen's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/bjks-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-twtReferences/linksEpisode of Black Goat Podcast I mentioned: https://blackgoat.podbean.com/e/simine-flips-out/Mini-interview with Simine in Science: https://www.science.org/content/article/how-reform-minded-new-editor-psychology-s-flagship-journal-will-shake-thingsMy 2nd interview w/ Adam Mastroianni, and his blog post on peer review:https://geni.us/bjks-mastroianni_2Interview w/ Chris Chambers and Peer community in RRhttps://geni.us/bjks-chambersSimine's vision statement for Psychological Sciencehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1mozmB2m5kxOoPvQSqDSguRrP5OobutU6/viewGOFUNDME for Data Colada's legal feeshttps://www.gofundme.com/f/uhbka-support-data-coladas-legal-defenseFrancesca  Gino's responsehttps://www.francesca-v-harvard.org/NYT Magazine article about Amy Cuddy (and Joe Simmons)https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/magazine/when-the-revolution-came-for-amy-cuddy.htmlStreisand effecthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effectHolcombe (during dogwalk). On peer review. Personal communication to Simine.Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science.Reich (2009): Plastic fantastic: How the Biggest Fraud in Physics Shook the Scientific

Welcome to a special bonus episode of The HPS Podcast with Professor of Psychology, Simine Vazire, discussing the ways in which HPS scholars and scientists can work together to create better science.We are releasing the episode to coincide with the campaign put together by Simine and others to support the legal defence of Data Colada – a group of professors who identify concerns with the integrity of published research. Members of Data Colada are being sued by Francesca Gino, a Harvard Business School Professor, after they published blog posts raising concerns about the data integrity of four papers on which Gino was a co-author. As the group says, “defending science requires defending legitimate scientific criticism against legal bullying”.In this podcast episode Indigo Keel, talks with Simine about more than just this one issue. They discuss Simine's connection to History and Philosophy of Science, the need for scientists to reflect on the practices of their discipline, issues that have arisen out of the replication crisis and cases of alleged scientific misconduct – including the Francesca Gino case. Simine highlights how philosophers of science can contribute to making science better.Relevant links:·       The GoFundMe Campaign to Support Data Colada's Legal Defense·       Vox Article: Is it Defamation to Point out Scientific Research Fraud?·       Data Colada Post (Part 1): “Clusterfake”·       Data Colada Post (Part 2): “My Class Year is Harvard”·       Data Colada Post (Part 3): “The Cheaters are Out of Order”·       Data Colada Post (Part 4): “Forgetting the Words”A transcript of the episode can be found here: https://www.hpsunimelb.org/post/bonus-episode-transcript Simine studies the research methods and practices used in psychology, as well as structural systems in science, such as peer review. Simine is editor in chief of Collabra: Psychology, one of the PIs on the repliCATS project (with Fiona Fidler), and co-founder (with Brian Nosek) of the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science.Thanks for listening to The HPS Podcast with your current hosts, Samara Greenwood and Carmelina Contarino.You can find more about us on our blog, website, bluesky, twitter, instagram and facebook feeds. This podcast would not be possible without the support of School of Historical and Philosophical Studies at the University of Melbourne.www.hpsunimelb.org

A few personal updates from your internet dad and then … WHO ARE WE? This one is a banger, folks. Personality researcher & psychology professor Dr. Simine Vazire dishes about introverts, extroverts, self-esteem, sociopaths, neuroticism, conscientiousness, Buzzfeed quizzes, yearbook inscriptions, trusting people, screwing up your kids, acting like your parents, changing personality traits through therapy or medication and astrology being put to the test. Also, Alie finds out what kind of dog she is. And thanks you for your #CritterPicforGrandpod. Dr. Simine Vazire on TwitterThis week's donation was made to improvingpsych.orgSponsor links at https://www.alieward.com/ologies-sponsorsMore links at alieward.com/ologies/personalitypsychologyencoreDr. Vazire's podcast, The Black GoatBecome a patron of Ologies for as little as a buck a month: www.Patreon.com/ologiesOlogiesMerch.com has hats, shirts, pins, totes!Follow @Ologies on Twitter or InstagramFollow @AlieWard on Twitter or InstagramSound editing by Jarrett Sleeper of MindJam Media & Steven Ray MorrisTheme song by Nick ThorburnSupport the show: http://Patreon.com/ologies

Dan and James discuss a new preprint that examined the types of limitations authors discuss in their published articles and whether these limitation types has changed over the past decade, especially in light of methodological reform efforts. Links * The Genetic Lottery (https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691190808/the-genetic-lottery)by Kathryn Paige Harden * The limitations preprint (https://psyarxiv.com/n4eq7/) by Beth Clarke and collegues * Simine Vazire's episode (https://everythinghertz.com/58) (also known as the one where Dan's wife starts going into labor) * The heartbeat paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945222000685) from Galvez-Pol and collegues * Rand Wilcox and robust statistical methods (https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-019-01246-w#article-info) * The tweet thread explainer (https://twitter.com/bethclarke_/status/1544646323684917248) from Beth Clarke Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

This week, we chat with fellow podcaster and social psychologist Mickey Inzlicht, Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto, and co-host of Two Psychologists Four Beer (with Yoel Inbar). We talk about the advisor-graduate student dynamic, the past and future of social psychology, the replication crisis, and discuss some of the recent Psych Academic Twitter controversies. Two Psychologists Four Beers: https://www.fourbeers.com/Sexism and Racism on Campus (with Anne Wilson): https://www.fourbeers.com/58The COVID debate (with Robb Willer and Simine Vazire): https://www.fourbeers.com/53Lee's tweet: https://twitter.com/PsychRabble/status/1360973699822796802Turns out Hoegaarden is Belgian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoegaarden_Brewery

In 2012, Rink Hoekstra received two emails on the same day. One was from a journal editor, telling him that a manuscript was being rejected based on the recommendations of two reviewers. The other was from one of those reviewers, complimenting the paper and congratulating him on a job well done. The reviewer, Fiona Fidler, discovered that her review had been altered, and Rink and Fiona teamed out to figure out why. We spoke with Rink in 2018 about what happened, but we held on to the interview in anticipation of the episode being covered by the press. There's now an article out in Science, by journalist Cathleen O'Grady. In our conversation we talk about what happened, and we broaden out to a discussion of publication ethics. Why would an editor want to change a review without asking the reviewer? How does that damage a system that already has so little accountability? And what can authors or reviewers do when they suspect something is up? Link: Delete offensive language? Change recommendations? Some editors say it’s OK to alter peer reviews, by Cathleen O'Grady 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 86. Our interview was recorded on October 26, 2018; the introduction was recorded on October 28, 2020.

Academics are under enormous stress right now, raising the possibility of a rising rate of burnout. Longtime structural trends in higher education have increased pressures for demonstrable productivity. On top of that are a global pandemic, resistance and backlash to calls for racial justice, and unstable politics in the U.S., the U.K., and elsewhere. In this episode we discuss burnout in academia. We focus on an emerging perspective from the healthcare field that describes burnout as resulting from moral injury. How is this idea relevant to people working in academia? In what ways can we be hurt by being trapped between the ideals and values that brought us into the field and the demands of our working environments? What can we do about it? Plus: A letter about reviewing papers from the global south that do not fit into the usual discourse. Links: Andrew Wilson's Twitter thread about burnout Moral Injury and Burnout in Medicine: A Year of Lessons Learned by Wendy Dean and Simon Talbot, Stat Burnout Is About Your Workplace, Not Your People by Jennifer Moss, Harvard Business Review Job Burnout by Christina Maslach, Wilmar Schaufeli, and Michael Leiter, Annual Review of Psychology 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 85. It was recorded on September 16/17 (US/AUS), 2020.

Robb Willer and Simine Vazire join the podcast to debate whether social science, in its current form, can usefully contribute to our response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Is psychology ready to give trustworthy advice to policy-makers? Plus: Yoel shirks his beer-drinking, yet again. Special Guests: Robb Willer and Simine Vazire.

Academics love awards. We give out career awards, mid-career awards, early-career awards. We give out awards for the best paper, the best theory, the best teaching, the best service. But what function do all those awards serve? And are we the better for having them? In this episode we talk about how awards fit into the academic ecosystem. How do recipients benefit from them? How do they help the organizations and research communities that give them out? What kinds of biases are baked into the system, and how can we counteract them? Should we consider radically changing how academic awards work, or even doing away with them? Plus: We answer a letter about why academia and policy research have such different norms around checking their numbers. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 84. It was recorded on September 2/3 (US/AUS), 2020.

The contact hypothesis is an old idea in social psychology. It posits that under the right circumstances, bringing people from different groups together can reduce prejudice. In this episode, we discuss a new field experiment by Salma Mousa testing whether putting Iraqi Christians and Muslims on soccer teams together can rebuild social cohesion after war. Part of our conversation focuses on the direct implications of this work for the contact hypothesis. We also discuss how this study stands out against some common patterns in social science research. Why, despite the long history of research and intuitive appeal of the contact hypothesis, have no studies like this been done before? How did this paper benefit from integrating rigorous quantitative methods with a careful understanding of history and context? How did a commitment to not just the letter, but also the spirit, of preregistration keep the conclusions aligned so well with the data? Plus: We answer a letter about whether the COVID pandemic means this is an especially bad time to start a Ph.D. program. Links: Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq, by Salma Mousa Can playing together help us live together? Commentary by Elizabeth Levy Paluck and Chelsey Clark Twitter thread by Betsy Paluck 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 83. It was recorded on August 19/20 (US/AUS), 2020.

Scientific journal articles have a lot of numbers. Scientists are smart people with even smarter computers, so an outsider might think that, if nothing else, you can count on the math checking out. But modern data analysis is complicated, and computational reproducibility is far from guaranteed. In this episode, we discuss a recent set of articles published at the journal Cortex. A group of authors set out to replicate an influential 2010 article that claimed that if you reactivate a fear-laden memory, it becomes possible to change the emotional association - something with clear relevance to clinical practice. Along the way, the replicating scientists encountered anomalies which led them to try to reproduce the analyses in the original study - and they discovered that they could not. We talk about what this means for science. What are the implications of knowing that for a nontrivial number if scientific studies, the math doesn't add up? Will a new era of open data and open code be enough to fix the problem? How much will Verification Reports - a new publication format that Cortex has introduced - help with that process? Plus: We answer a letter about swinging for the fences when your dream job comes up but you don't feel ready yet. Links: The three R's of scientific integrity: Replicability, reproducibility, and robustness, by Robert McIntosh and Chris Chambers The Validity of the Tool “statcheck” in Discovering Statistical Reporting Inconsistencies, by Michèle Nuijten et al Analytic reproducibility in articles receiving open data badges at Psychological Science: An observational study, by Tom Hardwicke 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher.   Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver.   This is episode 82. It was recorded on August 10, 2020.

How does psychology's response to the replication crisis fit into a broader history of science? In this episode we discuss a paper by sociologists Jeremy Freese and David Peterson that takes on that question. Are "epistemic activists" in psychology redefining what it means to be objective in science? Does a focus on reforming incentives mean we view scientists as economic actors for whom motives and dispositions are irrelevant? Does the last decade's growth in meta-research mean that meta-analysis is the new arbiter of objectivity? Does a shift to a systems perspective on science have parallels in other systemic analyses of institutions? Plus: We answer a letter about whether raising new concerns when you're reviewing a revision is obligatory, a jerk move, or both.   Links: Freese & Peterson (2018). The Emergence of Statistical Objectivity: Changing Ideas of Epistemic Vice and Virtue in Science. DOI, full text Twitter discussion about positionality statements in quant papers White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, by Robin DiAngelo Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry, by Helen Longino. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher.   Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver.   This is episode 81. It was recorded on July 22, 2020.

The upcoming academic term will be unusual, to say the least. The global pandemic led to emergency shutdowns in March, and it is likely that many colleges and universities will continue teaching partially or wholly online. And protests against anti-Black racism in the United States and elsewhere have led to institutional statements about taking an antiracist stand - which may or may not translate into real change. In this episode, we discuss some of the changes and how we are thinking about them in our work. How did we adapt our teaching for remote learning, and what do we think fall will look like? What changes can we make to our teaching and service to be more antiracist? How can we stay focused and motivated when we're acting as individuals against systemic problems? Plus, we answer a letter about working in the lab of your more senior and prominent partner. Simine chides her co-hosts over ignoring Southern Hemisphere seasons (and the one who writes episode titles promises to try harder, right after he gets this one pun out of his system). And Sanjay talks about coping with grief under social distancing. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 80. It was recorded on July 8, 2020.

Scientific knowledge is always contingent and uncertain, even when it's the best we have. Should that factor into how we communicate science to the public, and if so, how? We discuss a recent article about the effects of communicating uncertainty on people's trust in scientific findings and scientists. When should and shouldn't scientists communicate uncertainty, and how should they do it? How should scientists prioritize keeping people's trust versus being up front about what they don't know? What are the different sources of uncertainty in scientific knowledge, and how should scientists deal with all of them? Plus, we get a followup letter from someone who asked about career support for a nonacademic partner - and they share what they learned and how things worked out. Link: The effects of communicating uncertainty on public trust in facts and numbers, by Anne Marthe van der Bles 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 79. It was recorded on April 27, 2020.

The COVID-19 pandemic is creating major and serious disruptions to just about everything, and higher education is no exception. In this episode we talk about how our work has been affected by measures to slow down the coronavirus. How have we adjusted to remote teaching? What effects have the social distancing measures had on our research? How are we mentoring students in light of such an uncertain future? What bigger changes and disruptions could be in store for academia? Plus: We answer a letter about when and how students should draw on their expertise when their advisor is in a different discipline. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 78. It was recorded on April 7, 2020.

In recent years there has been a lot of talk about public trust in science - how much there is, in what ways, whether we deserve it or not. In this episode, we discuss an article by historian and philosopher Rachel Ankeny that asks whether "trust" is even the right concept to be talking about. What does it mean to trust an abstraction like "science"? When people argue about trust in science, are they even talking about the same thing - the findings, the people, the process, or something else? And we discuss Ankeny's proposed alternative: that instead of the public's trust, scientists should be seeking out engagement. What would an engagement model looks like? How would engagement benefit the public? How would it benefit science? And what about people who just wouldn't want to engage? Plus: We answer a letter from someone who likes, but doesn't love, teaching, and wants to know if that's good enough for academia. Links: How The Pandemic Will End, by Ed Yong in The Atlantic A comment on Everett et al. (2020): No evidence for the effectiveness of moral messages on public health behavioural intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic, by Farid Anvari. (Note: After we recorded the episode, the authors of the original paper updated it and then invited Farid to join them as a co-author. A great outcome!) The Taboo Against Explicit Causal Inference in Nonexperimental Psychology, by Michael Grosz, Julia Rohrer, and Felix Thoemmes Science in an age of scepticism, by Rachel Ankeny in Griffith Review 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 77. It was recorded on March 26, 2020.

Many important questions about cause and effect are impractical to answer with a randomized experiment. What should we do instead? In this episode we talk about doing causal inference with observational data. Has psychology's historical obsession with internal validity led it, ironically, to think about causal inference in an unsophisticated way? Can formal analytic tools like directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) tell us how to do better studies? Or is their main lesson don't bother trying? How do norms and incentives in publishing help or hurt in doing better causal inference? Plus: We answer a letter about applying to psychology grad school when your background is in data science. Links: Thinking Clearly About Correlations and Causation: Graphical Causal Models for Observational Data, by Julia M. Rohrer That one weird third variable problem nobody ever mentions: Conditioning on a collider, by Julia Rohrer The selection-distortion effect: How selection changes correlations in surprising ways, by Sanjay Srivastava 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 76. It was recorded on March 16, 2020.

The path from theory to study consists of a thousand decisions, big and small. How and how much do these decisions matter? We discuss a recent crowdsourced meta-study that tried to find out. Fifteen teams of researchers were given 5 different hypotheses and told to design a study to test them, then they ran all the studies and got widely varying results. What are the implications of this study for how we should think about the role of theory in study design? What does it say about the different functions of direct and conceptual replications? Is this evidence of hidden moderators? How predictable were the differences in results, and were they predictable because of differences in the study designers' expertise, biases, or something else? Plus: We answer a letter about getting scooped on a systematic review. Links: Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results by Landy et al. in Psychological Bulletin 200 researchers, 5 hypotheses, no consistent answers. Coverage at Wired by Christie Aschwanden 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 75. It was recorded on January 30, 2020.

Is the “business-as-usual” approach to science in crisis? Does the public have a good grasp of how scientific knowledge is really generated? And might scientists be as much prey to self-serving biases as the rest of us mortals? Simine Vazire joins Igor and Charles to discuss the thorny complexity of seeking reliable knowledge about the world and about ourselves, the perils of being a whistleblower in the competitive world of modern science, and the on-going scientific credibility revolution. We discuss meta-scientists, the Open Science movement, and the power of preprints to bust open the black box of peer review. Igor tries to unpack the dialectic of motives among the ‘data policemen,’ Simine issues a call-to-arms for a grassroots-powered future for the scientific community, and Charles learns that the planet of self-knowledge is in a galaxy still far, far away. Welcome to Episode 25. Special Guest: Simine Vazire.

How important is expertise in conducting replications? Many Labs 4 was a large, multi-lab effort that brought together 21 labs, running 2,220 subjects, to study that question. The goal was to compare replications with and without the involvement of the original authors to see if that made a difference. But things got complicated when the effect they chose to study - the mortality salience effect that is a cornerstone of terror management theory - could not be replicated by anyone. In this episode, we talk about the implications of Many Labs 4. What does and doesn't this study say about the importance of expertise and "secret sauce" in conducting replications? Should we necessarily expect that the effect of expertise is to make effects larger or more likely to replicate? What does this replication mean for terror management theory, which has been the focus of hundreds of studies and a 2010 meta-analysis that concluded that mortality salience effects are real and substantial? What place does terror management theory hold in the history of social psychology, and how is that similar or different from ego depletion, another theory that was supported by a meta-analysis but not by multi-lab replications? Plus: we answer a letter about weaponizing tenure if you get it. Links: Many Labs 4: Failure to Replicate Mortality Salience Effect With and Without Original Author Involvement A blog post about ML4 by three of its authors Two Decades of Terror Management Theory: A Meta-Analysis of Mortality Salience Research, published in 2010 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 74. It was recorded on January 22, 2020.

The Graduate Record Exam - the GRE - is widely used in graduate school admissions. In recent years however, a number of graduate programs, including a few in psychology, have stopped requiring it in a movement that has been dubbed "GRExit." In this episode we discuss the arguments around using the GRE in graduate admissions. What is the evidence for and against its validity? For and against the presence of bias against various groups? How much do we know about validity and bias in the other materials routinely considered in admission, like grades, undergraduate institution, research experience, and letters of recommendation? Are arguments over the GRE just a proxy for larger and more difficult arguments about the purpose and social value of graduate education? And for programs that are dropping the GRE, what are they doing instead, and how will we know what the effects of that are? Plus: we answer a letter about giving authorship to undergrads who made minimal contributions to a project in order to help them get into grad school.  Links: CRediT - Contributor Roles Taxonomy A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance, by Kuncel, Hezlett, and Ones (2001) Standardized tests predict graduate students' success, by Kuncel and Hezlett (2007) Beyond the GRE: Rethinking Admissions Procedures and GRE Scores Are Poor Predictors 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 73. It was recorded on January 6, 2020.

In our annual end-of-year episode, we talk about noteworthy reflections and events from the year that just passed. Alexa reflects on breakups, and wonders why we don't take them more seriously as a significant disruption to other people's lives. Sanjay talks about hitting a low point and deciding to finally do something about it. And Simine talks about starting a new relationship and finding a new job that will take her halfway around the world. Plus: we answer a letter about whether scientists should mix advocacy and science. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 72. It was recorded on December 10, 2019.

Peer review is a major part of how science works today. In this episode we talk about how we approach doing peer reviews. How do you distinguish between differences in approach or preference - "I would have done it a different way" - versus things that you should treat as objections? How much weight do you put on different considerations - the importance of the research question, the novelty, the theory, the methods, the results, and other factors? What's your actual process - do you read front-to-back, or jump around? How much do you edit and wordsmith your reviews? When there are appendices, supplements, open code and materials, and preregistrations, which things do you read and how do you factor them in? How do you think about your potential biases and how to mitigate them? Plus: We answer a letter about deciding whether to pursue a postdoc versus other options. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 71. It was recorded on December 6, 2019.

To get your PhD you have to do a dissertation. For some this is an important product that demonstrates your ability to produce original research. To others, it's a vestigial ritual and a waste of time on the way to becoming a productive scholar. In this episode we discuss dissertations - what they've been in the past, what they are today, and where they might go in the future. Is a dissertation necessary for the kinds of work that someone might do with a PhD? As graduate training has evolved, how well has the dissertation kept up? Are oral defenses a valuable part of the process or an elaborate hazing ritual? Are they better if they're public, private, or don't happen at all? And most importantly, should all defenses involve swords? Plus: We discuss a letter about escaping from a toxic and abusive advisor. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 70. It was recorded on November 20, 2019.

Speaking up about injustice and bad behavior in a professional setting - as a witness, or as the target of it - is hard. It's uncomfortable, it's difficult, and it can generate backlash and other risks for yourself and your career. In this episode, we talk about that moment when people finally decide to say something or do something. Simine shares the story of how she decided to go on the record about being groped at a conference - what brought her to that decision, and what happened as a result. And we talk about other cases of people speaking up about harassment, discrimination, professional misconduct, and more, including Jennifer Freyd's pay discrimination lawsuit against the University of Oregon. We talk about the burden of knowing something is wrong, how this dilemma often falls disproportionately on people who are vulnerable in other ways, and what factors can help somebody speak out. Plus: we respond to a letter about department leaders who are obsessed with bean-counting of grant dollars and impact factors. Links: N-best evaluation for academic hiring and promotion, by Michael Frank Making research evaluation more transparent: Aligning research philosophy, institutional values, and reporting, by Michael Dougherty, L. Robert Slevc, and James Grand, published at Perspectives in Psychological Science Dan Engber's Slate article where Simine went on the record What Reporting Sexual Harassment Taught Me, by Simine Vazire, published at Slate a little bit louder now, by Simine Vazire Taylor Swift’s Sexual Assault Testimony Was Sharp, Gutsy, and Satisfying Coverage of Jennifer Freyd's lawsuit: Psychology professor appeals dismissal in equal pay lawsuit with UO, Daily Emerald; and 47 Women's And Civil Rights Groups Support Equal Pay Lawsuit Against UO, OPB Why We Find and Expose Bad Science, by James Heathers 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 69. It was recorded on October 30, 2019.

Academics give a lot of talks. Job talks, conference talks, colloquium talks, brownbag talks, pub talks. In this episode we talk about talks. How do you approach different audiences and formats? How do you manage a format or audience where interrupting with questions is the norm? How, and how much, do you prepare for different kinds of talks? How do you handle nerves when the stakes feel high? We share some of our own observations and experiences about giving academic presentations. Plus: We answer a letter about how "alt-acs" are perceived within academia. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 68. It was recorded on October 16, 2019.

Scientists have to follow a lot of rules. We have IRB rules, journal submission rules, university rules - lots of rules. But some of the most important rules in science aren't rules at all - they are norms. Guiding principles that shape the work we do. In this episode, we discuss a classic paper by the sociologist Robert Merton on 4 norms that govern scientific work. Are these norms an expression of scientific values, or just a means to an end? How well do scientists follow them, individually or collectively? Is science doing as well today as Merton thought it was back in 1942 - and is following these norms really the way to make science work right? Plus: We answer a letter about question to ask a prospective PhD advisor. Links: Sanjay's muse, Mr. Autumn Man The normative structure of science by Robert Merton Normative dissonance in science: Results from a national survey of U.S. scientists by Melissa S. Anderson, Brian C. Martinson, and Raymond De Vries 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 67. It was recorded on October 8, 2019.

In a previous episode we talked about making small talk in academic life and in general. In this episode we continue the theme, taking a break from our usual Very Serious Topics to answer the ultimate small-talk question: What do you do for fun? We talk about what a week in our lives is like outside of work. How do we spend time when we're not "on the clock"? What is the right amount of socializing? (spoiler: not everybody has the same answer) How do our hobbies and avocations reflect back on our work - or give us a break from it? Plus: A letter about getting a mystifying cold shoulder from a senior colleague. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 66. It was recorded on September 27, 2019.

The three pillars of academic work are research, teaching, and service - in that order. But service is incredibly important for universities and professions to function well and for academics to contribute to their communities. In this episode we talk about how we think about service. How do decide what service to do, and how much? How do you manage service in relation to your other work? What are different kinds of service, and what do you get out of them? What should we do about colleagues who get less service because they won't do it or will do it badly? Plus: A letter about getting credit for open peer reviews. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 65. It was recorded on September 16, 2019.

In the past decade, scientists in psychology and elsewhere have changed a lot in how we evaluate what makes research replicable, robust, and credible. New theories and findings in metascience and methodology - and repopularization of old ones - have given us new ways to think critically about research. But what do we do when these concepts and arguments are used poorly or bad faith - applied wrongly or selectively, or misused to sow broad doubt in science? In this episode we talk about what happens when people try to claim the mantle of open science to advance some other agenda. How can we distinguish good use of open-science arguments from bad? How can scientists who care about open science effectively call out these arguments? Plus: A letter about negotiating for a partner who has a non-academic job. Links: Alexa on Two Psychologists Four Beers Everything Hertz gives Simine tips on moving to Australia The Hidden Half by Michael Blastland 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 64. It was recorded on August 27, 2019.

Part of academic life means talking to new people about yourself and your work - whether it's on a job interview, at a conference, or casual conversations outside of academic settings. In this episode we talk about talking to strangers. How do you answer default academic small-talk questions like "tell me about your work?" How do you shake out of them to move a conversation somewhere more interesting? Should you prepare or practice an elevator pitch? And when, if ever, is it safe to take off your headphones on an airplane? Plus: We try to answer a letter about how the academic job market in the U.S. views doctoral degrees from Australia. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 63. It was recorded on July 17, 2019.

Editors of scientific journals have a lot of power. For one thing, journals are the main way that scientific work is distributed, so editors' decisions control the flow of information among scientists and to the public. For another, publications are probably the single most consequential product in evaluating scientists for jobs and career advancement. Simine just wrapped up a term as an editor of a journal, and in this episode she reflects on how much power she had, why it was probably too much, and what she could do next about that. Her big idea is to "flip" herself - dedicate her time and energy to posting open reviews of preprints. Preprints are a way for scientists to distribute their work outside of the control of gatekeepers, and we talk about the promises and the perils of open reviewing and how Simine plans to do it in a principled and ethical way. Plus: We answer a letter about talking to colleagues outside the "open science bubble." Links: had i been editor in chief, Simine's vision statement for Psychological Science flip yourself - part i and flip yourself - part ii by Simine 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 62. It was recorded on June 20, 2019.

Research methods and statistics are a part of nearly every undergraduate psychology curriculum. They get dedicated courses of their own as well as coverage within other courses. In this episode we step back and reflect on how they should fit into an undergraduate curriculum and how we should be teaching them. Can and should we try to teach them important concepts without the underlying math? How do we integrate methodology into "substantive" teaching about psychology theories and findings? What should we do with the knowledge that many, probably most of our students will never calculate a correlation coefficient or run a t-test after they graduate? How idealistic versus pragmatic should we be about teaching these topics and what we'll actually get across? Plus: We respond to a letter from a new-ish grad student about mentoring an undergraduate who is writing their first paper.  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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 61. It was recorded on June 19, 2019.

Many academics have flexibility in when, where, and how they get work done. In this episode we talk about the work habits we've developed to be productive, and the ones we've tried on that didn't fit. What are the differences between working in an office, at home, at a cafe, or elsewhere? How do you create routines and protect your time to get things done? Is it better to work with other people or alone? How do you recognize when the advice that works for everybody else doesn't work for you? Plus: With some help from sociologist Jill Harrison, we answer a letter from a first-generation college student who's now in a Ph.D. program and having a hard time talking to family about what that's about. Links: Jill Harrison's profile Limbo: Blue-Collar Roots, White-Collar Dreams by Alfred Lubrano The Working-Class Studies Association LabScrum: A Case Study For Agility in Academic Research Labs by Lisa May and Tamara Runyon 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 60. It was recorded on May 31, 2019.

Most doctoral training in psychology follows an apprentice model: Grad students affiliate with a primary advisor and lab, and do most of their training under that one person. But what happens when grad students and professors develop professional relationships outside of that traditional model? In this episode we discuss the politics and etiquette of students and faculty interacting and working together outside of the advisor-advisee model. How much control do - and should - advisors have over their advisees? How should faculty go about supporting and criticizing the work of students from other labs? What are the issues involved when faculty intervene (or don't) in other advisor-advisee relationships? Plus: We answer a letter from an early-career researcher wondering if they should withdraw from a paper that is less rigorous and less open than they would like it to be. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 59. It was recorded on May 17, 2019.

To users of R, it is more than just another way to analyze data - it goes along with a different mindset about the centrality of coding in doing science, a way of thinking about openness and reproducibility, an intersecting set of tools, and a community of users with its own culture and mindset. In this episode we talk about the rise of R within the psychology research community. How has the importance of statistical software changed over time? Should we be teaching R to grads and undergrads? What have our own experiences learning new software been, and can you teach an old goat new tricks? Plus: We answer a letter about how to address ageism on the academic job market. 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 58. It was recorded on May 2, 2019.

What if there were no journals? Would academic life be barren and empty, noisy and chaotic, happy and egalitarian, or something else entirely? In this episode we conduct an extended thought experiment about life without journals, in order to probe questions about what journals actually do for us anyway, what are other ways to achieve those things, and how we might overcome the downsides of the current scientific publishing ecosystem. How else could peer review work? How would researchers find information and know what to read? Would we just replace our current heuristics and biases with new ones? Plus: We answer a letter about whether to slow down to do higher-quality research or to focus on flashy results at top journals. Links: Scientific Utopia: I. Opening scientific communication, by Brian Nosek and Yoav Bar-Anan Mike Frank's Twitter thread on an ethical framework for open science 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 57. It was recorded on April 17, 2019.

What is the connection between methodology and ethics? In the early days of the twenty-teens, some people referred to the changes afoot in psychology as a "scientific integrity movement," but that term quickly faded. In this episode, we explore the connections between scientific rigor and scientific ethics. What are the ethical dimensions of good methods? When do we have an ethical obligation to make sure that our studies can answer our questions? Are there ethical obligations that go beyond considerations around protecting human subjects? Why do we sometimes shy away from connecting science reform with ethical behavior? Plus: We answer a letter about data parasites. Links: Science and ethics in conducting, analyzing, and reporting psychological research, by Robert Rosenthal nothing beats something, by Simine Vazire Making data sharing count: a publication-based solution, by Krzysztof J. Gorgolewski, Daniel S. Margulies, and Michael P. Milham Practical tips for ethical data sharing, by Michelle Meyer 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 56. It was recorded on April 12, 2019.

Psychology calls itself a behavioral science, but how often do we measure actual behavior? In this episode we discuss what is involved in measuring realistic, meaningful behavior in psychology research - not just self-reports and response times. What counts as "behavior" anyway? Why does it seem like psychologists measure less behavior than they used to? What are the scientific, professional, or logistical reasons why researchers decide not to measure behavior? Our discussion is anchored around an article by Roy Baumeister, Kathleen Vohs, and David Funder with the delightful title "Psychology as the Science of Self-Reports and Finger Movements: Whatever Happened to Actual Behavior?" (linked below). Plus: We answer a letter about whether or how to try to get a retention offer as you are advancing in your career. Links: Psychology as the Science of Self-Reports and Finger Movements: Whatever Happened to Actual Behavior? by Roy Baumeister, Kathleen Vohs, and David Funder (full text) Measuring Happiness Is Harder (But Maybe Also Easier) Than You Think, by Rich Lucas Social Psychology and Science: Some Lessons From Solomon Asch by Paul Rozin (full text) Hedge drift and advanced motte-and-bailey, by Stefan Schubert 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 55. It was recorded on March 18, 2019.

If you are a scientist, criticizing science is a part of the job. We write peer reviews of papers and grants; after talks we ask questions, make comments, and ask questions that are more of a comment; and sometimes we even run replications or new studies to test each other's conclusions. But the scientific ecosystem does not have people who hold the dedicated job of science critic, in the way that fields like art, theater, and music have critics. In this episode we consider an argument made by philosopher Don Ihde that the scientific ecosystem needs such people too - people whose job it is to criticize science from outside the day-to-day practice of it. What is the case for dedicated critics? Are there important kinds of criticism that scientists are not currently making? What would that job look like, and how would it differ from the peer criticism that scientists currently do? Plus: We respond to a letter about how to start getting asked to review papers. Links: Why Not Science Critics? by Don Ihde (full text) 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 54. It was recorded on February 18, 2019.

Self-promotion: the idea makes some people cringe and others salivate. In this episode, we talk about self-promotion in academic science. What amount - and maybe more importantly, what kind - is right? Why do some people shy away from it while others dive in? What even counts as self-promotion? Is it a luxury to be able to do without active self-promotion? How do cultural and other differences play into self-promotion? Plus: We answer a letter about bringing open science practices into clinical psychology. Links: Leveraging the open science framework in clinical psychological assessment research, by Jennifer Tackett, Cassandra Brandes, and Kathleen Reardon Using implementation science to close the gap between the optimal and typical practice of quantitative methods in clinical science, by Kevin King, Michael D. Pullmann, Aaron R. Lyon, Shannon Dorsey, and Cara C. Lewis Practical tips for ethical data sharing, by Michelle N. Meyer Recommendations for increasing the transparency of analysis of pre-existing datasets, by Sara Weston, Stuart Ritchie, Julia Rohrer, and Andrew Przybylski Dorothy Bishop's blog, BishopBlog Teaching replication, by Michael C. Frank and Rebecca Saxe The Collaborative Replications and Education Project A few people to follow on Twitter for open and transparent clinical psychological science: Grace Binion, Cassie Brandes, Kevin King, Kathleen Reardon, Jennifer Tackett 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @blackgoatpod. You can email us at letters@theblackgoatpodcast.com. You can subscribe to us on iTunes or Stitcher. Our theme music is Peak Beak by Doctor Turtle, available on freemusicarchive.org under a Creative Commons noncommercial attribution license. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 53. It was recorded on February 15, 2019.

WHO ARE WE? Personality researcher & psychology professor Dr. Simine Vazire dishes about introverts, extroverts, self-esteem, sociopaths, neuroticism, conscientiousness, Buzzfeed quizzes, yearbook inscriptions, trusting people, screwing up your kids, acting like your parents, changing personality traits through therapy or medication and astrology being put to the test. Also, Alie finds out what kind of dog she is. Dr. Simine Vazire on Twitter This week's donation was made to improvingpsych.org Sponsor links: TheGreatCourses.com/ologies, Takecareof.com (promo code: Ologies50), Handy.com/ologies (promo code: Ologies), and TimesuckPodcast.com More links at alieward.com/ologies/personalitypsychology Dr. Vazire's podcast, The Black Goat Become a patron of Ologies for as little as a buck a month: www.Patreon.com/ologies OlogiesMerch.com has hats, shirts, pins, totes! Follow @Ologies on Twitter or Instagram Follow @AlieWard on Twitter or Instagram Sound editing by Jarrett Sleeper of MindJam Media &  Steven Ray Morris Theme song by Nick Thorburn Support the show.

Love them or hate them, conferences are a big part of academic life. In this episode we talk about getting the most out of a conference experience. How do you meet people (the dreaded "networking") and make the transition from feeling awkward to comfortable when you're new to a conference? How do you decide what to go to and what to skip? What are the etiquette and norms you should know about? How does the experience of going to a conference change over the course of your career? We share our tips, experiences, and stories from over the years. Plus: A letter about getting familiar with the literature for your first research project. Links: Nobody Goes There Anymore, It's Too Crowded, our previous episode on whether conferences should even exist (but if you came down on "no," consider the latest episode harm reduction) 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, on Facebook at facebook.com/blackgoatpod/, and on instagram at @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. Our logo was created by Jude Weaver. This is episode 52. It was recorded on January 25, 2019.