Nullius in Verba

Dive into the intriguing world of tacit knowledge as the hosts unravel its hidden layers in science. From how we internalize skills like riding a bike to the unseen impacts on experiment replication, they explore why this concept has lingered in obscurity. Hear about concealed methods, relational knowledge, and the influence of technology in bridging gaps. The discussion also touches on sociological aspects within academia, mentorship dynamics, and the role of unspoken rules in fostering success. A thought-provoking journey into what we know but struggle to express!

Dive into the intriguing world of p-hacking! Discover how naming this practice raised awareness about replication failures in research. The conversation explores whether public accusations have driven positive changes in research norms. Challenges of interpreting p-value distributions and biases affecting publication incentives are dissected. The hosts suggest that transparency and pre-registration could combat p-hacking. They also discuss the role of compelling storytelling in shaping research outcomes, emphasizing the need for integrity in scientific pursuits.

This engaging discussion dives into the intriguing world of p-hacking and its many aliases like data dredging. The hosts explore how flexible analytics can lead to inflated error rates and why terminology matters in research ethics. They debate the fine line between questionable practices and outright fraud, analyzing the personal sensitivities surrounding such accusations. Listeners will learn about common p-hacking strategies, the implications of analysis choices, and the challenge researchers face in clarifying past behaviors. Tune in for a thought-provoking journey!

In this episode, we discuss unethical research. What are some examples of egregious violations of ethical guidelines? What are some more subtle ways in which research can be unethical?And what should we do with results obtained through unethical research?   Shownotes The Nuremberg Code The Declaration of Helsinki Three Identical Strangers The ethical implications of the "Monster Study" 'Little Albert' regains his identity Caplan, A. L. (2021). How should we regard information gathered in Nazi experiments?. AMA Journal of Ethics, 23(1), 55-58. Is it right to use Nazi research if it can save lives?  

Boring, E. G. (1929). The psychology of controversy. Psychological Review, 36(2), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072273

Boring, E. G. (1929). The psychology of controversy. Psychological Review, 36(2), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072273

In the second episode on metascience, we discuss the benefits of metascientific study according to Mario Bunge, some key milestones in sociology, psychology, and anthropology of science, and whether there should be a science of the science of science.   Shownotes Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. McMillian & Co. https://archive.org/details/englishmenofscie00galtuoft Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Sage Publications.  Candolle, A. de (with Fisher - University of Toronto). (1873). Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles; suivie d’autres études sur des sujets scientifiques, en particulier sur la sélection dans l’espèce humaine. Genève, Georg. http://archive.org/details/histoiredesscie00cand Vaesen, K. (2021). French Neopositivism and the Logic, Psychology, and Sociology of Scientific Discovery. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 11(1), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1086/712934  

Delve into the intriguing realm of metascience, exploring its historical roots and its distinction from the philosophy and history of science. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding scientific methods and historical context for improving practices. Discover how psychology intertwines with scientific inquiry, the significance of academic freedom, and the challenges posed by replication studies. Plus, learn about innovative courses aimed at bridging gaps in metascience education and fostering integrity in academic publishing.

Bunge, M. (1959). Why metascience? Metascientific Queries (pp. 3-27). Charles C Thomas. 

The podcast dives into the potential pitfalls of premature experimentation in psychology. It questions whether traditional methods overshadow other approaches, using an amusing Martian analogy to illustrate funding disparities in research. Historical critiques and the evolution of psychological methodologies are dissected, highlighting the need for diverse research techniques. A discussion on the significance of qualitative research reveals its often-overlooked value. The complexities of measuring true understanding and the pitfalls of conventional norms provide a compelling call for innovation in psychological inquiry.