Is the bar for what counts as new knowledge higher in psychology than in other scientific fields? Why did the field of psychology formally start centuries later than other scientific fields? Why is it so hard to make progress in psychology? How useful are social science "mega-studies"? What actually helps people stick to habits? What do scientists often get wrong about the philosophy of science? What have social scientists learned so far from the replication crisis? And how does that compare to what they should perhaps have been learning from it? Why is so much meaningless, useless psych research still being done? How can scientists communicate about their work more effectively? When might a blog be a better outlet than an academic journal for a scientific report? Is there a tension in science communication between honesty and explicability? What are the pros and cons of peer review?

Adam Mastroianni is a psychologist and metascientist who writes the popular blog Experimental History. He got his PhD in 2021 and then left academia to publish research directly to the public, like a crazy person. Learn more about him at his website, experimental-history.com.

Further reading

• "Things could be better", by Adam Mastroianni
• Spencer's analysis of the gym mega-study

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift