BJKS Podcast

Erik Wengström is a Professor of Economics at Lund University where he studies how people behave in economic and financial situations.  In this conversation, we talk about his study about loss aversion when deciding for others and his recent study on prosociality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Along the way, we also discuss the differences and similarities between economics and psychology. 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.).Timestamps0:00:04: What is loss aversion?0:05:45: Start discussing Erik's paper Deciding For Others Reduces Loss Aversion0:16:01: Generalising decision-making across different contexts0:20:28: The relationship between economics and psychology0:30:45: Peer-review and publishing in economics0:44:14: Start discussing Erik's study on prosociality during the COVID-19 pandemic0:50:09: Deception in psychology and economics experiments0:53:39: The risk dictator game1:03:50: Comparing our COVID study with Erik's studyPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastErik's linksWebsite: https://sites.google.com/site/erikwengstrom/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=SRPZRHoAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/ErikWengstromBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/bjks_tweetsReferencesAndersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J. R., & Wengström, E. (2016). Deciding for others reduces loss aversion. Management Science.Andersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J. R., & Wengström, E. (2020). Risking Other People's Money: Experimental Evidence on the Role of Incentives and Personality Traits. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics.Andersson, O., Campos-Mercade, P., Meier, A., & Wengström, E. (2020). Anticipation of COVID-19 vaccines reduces social distancing. Available at SSRN 3765329.Campos-Mercade, P., Meier, A. N., Schneider, F. H., & Wengström, E. (2021). Prosociality predicts health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Public Economics.Kuper-Smith, B. J., Doppelhofer, L. M., Oganian, Y., Rosenblau, G., Korn, C. W. (2021. Risk perception and optimism during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv.Smaldino: my conversation with Paul Smaldino about formal modelling: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/1390924/7048246-8-paul-smaldino-cubist-chickens-formal-models-and-the-psychology-curriculumTversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The quarterly journal of economics.

This is a new kind of episode for this podcast: in addition to the interviews, I will now do a book club in which I and a friend read a long book (>500 pages) I've always wanted to read but haven't gotten around to.  We will read around 100 pages per week and sit down for an hour to chat about the book. To not clog up the podcast feed, I'll publish two discussions in one episode every other week. The first book in this book club is Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment (Oliver Ready's translation for Penguin Classics). In this episode, we introduce the series in general and discuss parts 1 and 2 of Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment.For this first book club series, I'm joined by Antonia. We did our Masters degree in Brain and Mind Sciences together at UCL. Since then, Antonia has gotten a PhD in psychology and now works in scientific publishing. Some important notes:1) Spoiler alert: we will discuss whatever happened in the book so far2) You can listen to the episodes without having read the book, but I'm not sure how much sense it wil make. We asume you've read as far as we have. There will be a brief summary at the beginning of each chat, but this is a brief reminder of what happened, not a complete retelling of the story3) We're using Oliver Ready's translation, published by Penguin Classic. You don't have to have the same version, but it might make it easier when mentioning  page numbers. Also, we really like this translation!4) This format is quite experimental and it took us 1-2 discussions to find our groove. After this episode, we've found our pattern and the quality of the discussion improves quite a bit5) Finally, at first I thought this was going to be published as a separate podcast, but I've now decided to make it part of the BJKS Podcast after all. So you can ignore the beginning where I say that this is a new and unnamed podcastTimestamps0:00:05: Introducing this new type of episode, and discussing the weird shape of Ben's physical copy0:07:36: Beginning Part 10:55:16: Beginning Part 21:04:05: End summary of Part 2, beginning of discussionLink to photo of my pentagonal copy: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcast/status/1397595784200216577Podcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJ  Twitter:  https://twitter.com/bjks_tweets   

Bianca Trovò is a PhD student at Neurospin and Sorbonne Université, where she studies self-initiated movements. Recently, she is a developer of Ants-Review, a blockchain-based protocol for incentivising scientific peer review. In this conversation, we talk mainly about Ants-Review and I ask questions from the perspective of a scientist who isn't particularly familiar with blockchain and cryptography.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.).Timestamps0:00:10: How Ants-Review got started0:14:07: So what's wrong with peer review (in its current form)?0:26:14: Incentives in Ants-Review 0:40:02: Can people cheat on  Ants-Review?0:52:44: Will reviews on Ants-Review be many micro-reviews, rather than a few traditional reviews?0:59:47: Why does Ants-Review need to be done in blockchain?1:21:53: Academic articles as NFTs?1:24:40: The future of Ants-Review 1:35:11: How can people contribute to Ants-Review (incl. quadratic funding)?1:41:12: How easy is it to use Ants-Review?Ants-Review linkshttps://twitter.com/antsreviewhttps://antsreview.substack.com/Bianca's paper outlining  Ants-Review: Trovò, B., & Massari, N. (2021). Ants-Review: A Privacy-Oriented Protocol for Incentivized Open Peer Reviews on Ethereum. In Euro-Par 2020: Parallel Processing Workshops (Vol. 12480, p. 18). Nature Publishing Group. Video runthrough of Ants-Review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXNpBpWQo60Gitcoin Grant: https://gitcoin.co/grants/1628/anPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastBianca's linksWebsite: https://umr-lams.academia.edu/BiancaTrov%C3%B2Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=hoCMB_kAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/bianca_troveauxBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/bjks_tweetsAdditional references and links 3blue1brown video on bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4Bianca's questions to Alexandra Elbakyan:Q1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccqcY0YBfIw&t=1075sQ2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccqcY0YBfIw&t=11129sButerin, Vitalik's blog post about quadratic funding: https://vitalik.ca/general/2019/12/07/quadratic.htmlGame theory introduction: here is the brief and fun introduction to game theory that Bianca mentions at around the 47-minute mark: https://ncase.me/trust/

Brock Bastian is a professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne whose research focuses on pain, happiness, and morality.  In this conversation, we talk about Brock's work on how and why pain is meaningful. We talk about Brock's work on pain and cooperation, reproducibility in social psychology, his books The Other Side of Happiness, the value of doing shit jobs, Brave New World, and much more.  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.).  Timestamps  0:00:05: Pain and cooperation  0:18:22: When is a paper ready?  0:22:37: Reproducibility: when can you trust a paper?  0:28:44: Discussing the making of Brock's book The Other Side of Happiness  0:42:39: When should something be easy and when is it good for something to be difficult?  0:52:59: Brock's dog adds a valuable comment  0:54:01: The value of doing shit jobs  0:57:23: What's dystopian about Huxley's Brave New World?  1:03:23: Is something like Soma possible and would people use it?  Podcast links  Website: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/  Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcast  Brock's links  Website: http://www.brockbastian.com/  Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=WudErsQAAAAJ  Twitter: https://twitter.com/drbrockbastian/  Ben's links  Website: www.bjks.blog/  Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJ   Twitter:  https://twitter.com/bjks_tweets  References   Bastian, B. (2018). The other side of happiness: Embracing a more fearless approach to living. Penguin UK.   Brock's debate with David Pearce: https://www.pairagraph.com/dialogue/b5578a55839c4218a03c2a43e83f4076  Bastian, B., Jetten, J., & Ferris, L. J. (2014). Pain as social glue: Shared pain increases cooperation. Psychological Science.  Bastian, B., Jetten, J., Thai, H. A., & Steffens, N. K. (2018). Shared adversity increases team creativity through fostering supportive interaction. Frontiers in Psychology.  Huxley, A. (1932). Brave New World.  Leknes, S., & Bastian, B. (2014). The benefits of pain. Review of Philosophy and Psychology.  Wiltermuth, S. S., & Heath, C. (2009). Synchrony and cooperation. Psychological Science.  Xygalatas, D., Mitkidis, P., Fischer, R., Reddish, P., Skewes, J., Geertz, A. W., ... & Bulbulia, J. (2013). Extreme rituals promote prosociality. Psychological Science.  

Kate Jeffery is a professor of behavioural neuroscience at University College London, where she works on spatial navigation. In this conversation, we talk about the history of spatial navigation, Kate's work on grid cells and place cells in 3D, and her recent work on entropy and brain evolution.  Timestamps0:00:05: Kate's journey from medicine to neuroscience 0:10:57: A brief history of spatial navigation0:30:43: PhD applications now and in 19900:34:38: Kate recorded grid cells 10 years before their discovery, without realising it0:52:00: Prizes in science1:05:20: A brief interlude as Kate gives her cat a treat 1:05:48: Lessons from working with Richard Morris and John O'Keefe1:09:28: Spatial navigation in 3D1:34:54: How many dimensions can the hippocampal formation track?1:40:50: Kate's collaboration with Carlo Rovelli  Podcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastKate's linksWebsite: https://jefferylab.com/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=l1VlIFAAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/drkjjefferyBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJ  ReferencesAronov et al 2017. Mapping of a non-spatial dimension by the hippocampal–entorhinal circuit. Nature  Bliss & Lømo 1973. Long‐lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path. J Physiol  Burgess 2014. The 2014 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine: a spatial model for cognitive neuroscience. Neuron  Casali et al 2019. Altered neural odometry in the vertical dimension. PNAS  Fyhn et al 2004. Spatial representation in the entorhinal cortex. Science  Grieves et al 2020. The place-cell representation of volumetric space in rats. Nat Commun  Grieves et al 2020. Grid cell firing fields in a volumetric space. bioRxiv Hafting et al 2005. Microstructure of a spatial map in the entorhinal cortex. NatureJeffery et al 1997. Directional control of hippocampal place fields. Exp Brain ResJeffery & Morris 1993. Cumulative long-term potentiation in the rat dentate gyrus correlates with, but does not modify, performance in the water maze. HippocampusJeffery & O’Keefe 1999. Learned interaction of visual and idiothetic cues in the control of place field orientation. Exp Brain ResJeffery et al 2019. On the statistical mechanics of life: Schrödinger revisited. EntropyJeffery & Rovelli 2020. Transitions in brain evolution: space, time and entropy. Trends NeurosciMorris et al 1982. Place navigation impaired in rats with hippocampal lesions. NatureO'Keefe & Dostrovsky 1971. The hippocampus as a spatial map: Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat. Brain ResRanck 1984. Head direction cells in the deep layer of dorsal presubiculum in freely moving rats. In Society of Neurosci AbstractRovelli 2016. Seven brief lessons on physicsShannon 1948. The mathematical theory of communicationStensola et al 2012. The entorhinal grid map is discretized. NatureYartsev et al 2011. Grid cells without theta oscillations in the entorhinal cortex of bats. Nature

Tessa Rusch is a postdoc working on computational modelling of social interactions at Caltech in the labs of Ralph Adolphs and John O'Doherty. She is also part of COVID-Dynamic project, a large-scale longitudinal study on the psychological effects of the COVID pandemic.  In this conversation, we talk about Tessa's experiences of being part of such a large project, about her move to the US just before the pandemic, and about her review on computational models and bevioural tasks of Theory of Mind.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.).Timestamps0:00:04: Before Tessa's PhD0:04:07: Tessa's first year in the US, during the pandemic0:16:51: Tessa's original plan for her postdoc with Ralph Adolphs and John O'Doherty 0:24:22: How COVID-Dynamic got started0:32:42: The practicalities of running a large collaborative study0:43:37: Social changes during an extremely variable time0:55:03: Working with complex data sets1:14:02: Doing COVID research while working on other projects1:20:48: Discussing Tessa's review article about Theory of Mind from Neuropsychologia1:47:27: Tessa's final words of wisdomPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastTessa's linksWebsite: https://www.hss.caltech.edu/people/tessa-ruschGoogle Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=OzT7c-oAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/tessa_ruschBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJReferencesKuper-Smith, B. J., Doppelhofer, L. M., Oganian, Y., Rosenblau, G., & Korn, C. (2020). Optimistic beliefs about the personal impact of COVID-19. PsyArXiv.Post, T., Van den Assem, M. J., Baltussen, G., & Thaler, R. H. (2008). Deal or no deal? decision making under risk in a large-payoff game show. American Economic Review.Rusch, T., Han, Y., Liang, D., Hopkins, A., Lawrence, C., Maoz, U., ... & Stanley, D. (2021). COVID-Dynamic: A large-scale multifaceted longitudinal study of socioemotional and behavioral change across the pandemic. PsyArXiv.Rusch, T., Steixner-Kumar, S., Doshi, P., Spezio, M., & Gläscher, J. (2020). Theory of mind and decision science: towards a typology of tasks and computational models. Neuropsychologia.van Baar, J. M., Chang, L. J., & Sanfey, A. G. (2019). The computational and neural substrates of moral strategies in social decision-making. Nature communications.Van den Assem, M. J., Van Dolder, D., & Thaler, R. H. (2012). Split or steal? Cooperative behavior when the stakes are large. Management Science.

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.

Eiko Fried is an Assistant Professor of Clinical Psychology at Leiden University. He recently published a target article in Psychological Inquiry about the lack of theory building in network and factor models, and how this impedes progress.In this conversation, we talk about that article, problems with theories in psychology, Eiko's general approach to science, and much more.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.).Timestamps0:00:04: Eiko's photography0:03:33: The Lancet Psychiatry profile about Eiko / being a generalist0:15:42: Eiko's "No Committee"0:26:33: Begin discussing Eiko's paper "Lack of theory..."0:49:55: Theories don't have to be correct0:53:02: Model comparison in network and factor models, and constraints of the scientific (publishing) industry1:14:14: Useful fictions in science1:22:03: Writing critiques without pointing fingers1:25:03: Paul Meehl1:28:09: Education in PsychologyPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastEiko's linksWebsite: https://eiko-fried.com/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=DUK0qQoAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/EikoFriedBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJPaul Meehl's lectures on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzRWx56_mpAT5yWRI-po-ybK9uAyZNX_zReferencesBorsboom, D. (2013). Theoretical amnesia. Open Science Collaboration Blog.Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against method.Fried, E. I. (2020). Lack of theory building and testing impedes progress in the factor and network literature. Psychological Inquiry.Fried, E. I., Greene, A. L., & Eaton, N. R. (2021). The p factor is the sum of its parts, for now. World Psychiatry.Frith, U. (2020). Fast lane to slow science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.Kellen, D., Davis-Stober, C., Dunn, J. C., & Kalish, M. (2020). The problem of coordination and the pursuit of structural constraints in psychology. PsyArXiv.Kendler, K. S., Aggen, S. H., Werner, M., & Fried, E. I. (2020). A topography of 21 phobic fears: network analysis in an epidemiological sample of adult twins. Psychological Medicine.Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of consulting and clinical Psychology.Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and amending theories: The strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that warrant it. Psychological Inquiry.Meehl, P. E. (1990). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports.Morgan, J. (2019). Eiko Fried: organising incoherence with models, networks, and systems. The Lancet Psychiatry.Smaldino, P. E. (2017). Models are stupid, and we need more of them. Computational Social Psychology.Yarkoni, T. (2020). Implicit realism impedes progress in psychology: Comment on Fried (2020). Psychological Inquiry.

Jesse Geerts is a PhD student at the Sainsbury Wellcome Centre at UCL, in the lab of Neil Burgess. We met a few years ago when we were in the same cohort of the Dual Masters in Brain and Mind Sciences, hosted in the first year in London by UCL and in the second year in Paris by UPMC and ENS.In this conversation, we talk about Jesse's new paper in PNAS, what it's like to do his PhD programme, how to know when a paper is ready to be submitted, and a bunch of other topics.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: During the recording, there was a 4-second delay, but I hope I edited it out alright0:01:16: Finishing our PhDs0:15:23: Jesse's experience in the Sainsbury Wellcome PhD Programme0:23:41: Deciding what PhD project to do (and with whom)0:54:15: Ask for help (unless the solution can be googled)0:58:30: Discussion Jesse's PNAS paper1:30:22: Idea for a new podcast: Ben's Roast1:33:45: Evaluating whether a model works1:39:21: When is a paper ready?1:47:00: What's next for Jesse P. Geerts?Podcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastJesse's linksWebsite: https://www.jessegeerts.com/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=4xusDVAAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/jesse_geertsJesse's PhD programme: https://www.sainsburywellcome.org/web/content/phd-programmeBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJReferencesGeerts, J. P., Chersi, F., Stachenfeld, K. L., & Burgess, N. (2020). A general model of hippocampal and dorsal striatal learning and decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.Geerts, J. P., Stachenfeld, K. L., & Burgess, N. (2019). Probabilistic successor representations with Kalman temporal differences. arXiv.Kuper-Smith, B. J., Doppelhofer, L. M., Oganian, Y., Rosenblau, G., & Korn, C. (2020). Optimistic beliefs about the personal impact of COVID-19. PsyArXiv.Stachenfeld, K. L., Botvinick, M. M., & Gershman, S. J. (2017). The hippocampus as a predictive map. Nature Neuroscience.

Hanne Watkins is an adviser for the Behavioural Economics Team of the Australian Government. Previously, she was a PhD student and postdoc studying how humans think about morality in the context of war.In this conversation, we talk about Hanne's move from academia to governmental work, and about her previous work on morality in a war context. We also talk about her experience of running a Registered Report, something I've read a fair bit about, but haven't yet gotten around to doing myself.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.).Timestamps0:00:57: How Hanne's work in behavioural insight for the Australian government relates to her previous academic work0:35:34: Registered Reports: Hanne's practical experiences writing a Registered Report0:56:16: Morality in warPodcast linksWebsite: https://bjks.buzzsprout.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/BjksPodcastHanne's linksWebsite: https://sites.google.com/view/hannemwatkinsOld blog: https://myscholarlygoop.wordpress.com/BETA: https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=e5jaGiUAAAAJTwitter: https://twitter.com/hm_watkinsBen's linksWebsite: www.bjks.blog/Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=-nWNfvcAAAAJReferencesThaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin.Watkins, H. M., & Brandt, M. (2019). The moral landscape of war: A registered report testing how the war context shapes morality's constraints on default representations of possibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Watkins, H. M. (2020). The morality of war: A review and research agenda. Perspectives on Psychological Science.