Two Psychologists Four Beers

Yoel and Mickey welcome their University of Toronto colleague and close friend, psychologist Elizabeth Page-Gould. Liz, who is an expert in close friendship, tries to help Yoel and Mickey fall in love with each other…and with her…by administering the so-called fast-friends procedure. By answering questions of increasing intimacy and revealing personal stories, Yoel, Mickey, and Liz grow in rapport over the course of the hour, sometimes uncovering deep emotions. Bonus: Yoel and Mickey discuss a new paper in Science Magazine suggesting that judgments of blue dots can help us understand the advent of concepts such as micro-aggressions. Special Guest: Elizabeth Page-Gould.Links:Blanche De Chambly | UnibroueElizabeth Page-Gould's Web SitePrevalence-induced concept change in human judgment | ScienceA non‐representational approach to imagined actionGeneralizability by Representativeness | Paul Litvak36 Questions for Increasing ClosenessTo Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This

Yoel and Mickey welcome Yale psychologist Paul Bloom to the show, their very first guest. In a far ranging conversation, Yoel, Mickey, and Paul discuss the potential benefits of pain. Why do we sometimes choose to suffer? Are there any benefits (to self or society) to being a painful or disagreeable person? Why do we enjoy and seek out aversive fiction, be that in books, TV, or film? Why do so many of the goals that we set and pursue involve pain and suffering? Bonus: Yoel, Mickey, and Paul each completed a validated measure of agreeableness. Can you guess who came out on “top”?Special Guest: Paul Bloom.Links:Disco Soleil | Brasserie Dieu du Ciel!Paul Bloom | Brooks and Suzanne Ragen Professor of Psychology at Yale UniversityAgainst Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion: Paul Bloom: 9780062339331: Amazon.com: BooksColin DeYoungBetween facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five.Do nice guys--and gals--really finish last? The joint effects of sex and agreeableness on income. - PubMed - NCBIGlad to be sad, and other examples of benign masochismThe Long and Short of It - Paul Bloom

In their most emotional episode yet, Yoel and Mickey discuss the replication crisis in psychology. What is meant by the replication crisis and how did it get started? Why does it appear like the field is split into two, with some young academics actively trying to reform psychology and more senior scholars suggesting the problems have been mostly overstated? How have academics dealt with the possibility that their own work might not be robust and replicable? Finally, how did one of the most notorious academic fraudsters get caught? Bonus: Did Mickey spike Toxoplasma gondii (crazy cat lady parasite) in Yoel’s beer?Links:Bellwoods Brewery Cat LadyGueuze and Gose - What's the difference?Tatter PodcastIs science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to? | PNASFeeling The Future: Is Precognition Possible?False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant by Joseph P. Simmons, Leif D. Nelson, Uri Simonsohn :: SSRNThe Data Vigilante - The AtlanticOver half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test : Nature News & CommentList of Registered Replication ReportsEgo depletion, an influential theory in psychology, may have just been debunked.Reckoning with the Past — Michael InzlichtEverything is fucked: The syllabusDiederik Stapel’s Audacious Academic Fraud - The New York TimesDiederik Stapel's Autobiography

Yoel and Mickey take a deep dive into the so-called Intellectual Dark Web (IDW). What is the IDW and who are the prominent members of this group? Why do members of the IDW seem so cranky? Are members of the IDW actually being silenced, and given their massive popularity, who is silencing them? Is the IDW a positive and new development in our culture? Should the members of the IDW be concerned about some of their fans and followers? Bonus: Why did Yoel decide to have us drink the champagne of beers?Links:Meet the Renegades of the Intellectual Dark Web — An alliance of heretics is making an end run around the mainstream conversation. Should we be listening?After Evergreen - The Stranger — One Year Later, Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying Look BackThe Sam Harris-Ezra Klein debate - Vox — Ezra and Sam Harris debate race, IQ, identity politics, and much more. Sam Harris and the Myth of Perfectly Rational Thought | WIRED — The famous proponent of New Atheism is on a crusade against tribalism but seems oblivious to his own version of it.Can Things Be Both Popular And Silenced? | Slate Star Codex — CAN THINGS BE BOTH POPULAR AND SILENCED?Pretty Loud For Being So Silenced | Current Affairs — Critics of the left aren’t oppressed and they don’t believe in “rational debate.”Intellectual Dark Web: Bari Weiss’s Analysis Is a Little Off | National Review — First, let me say that the phrase “Intellectual Dark Web” strikes me as a marketing label — and not necessarily a good one.Quillette MagazineMost in U.S. Oppose Colleges Considering Race in Admissions — - Seven in 10 Americans say merit should be only basis for college admissions - 65% disagree with Supreme Court decision allowing race to be a factor - By 50% to 44%, blacks favor merit, not raceMiller High Life | The Champagne of BeersFireball Cinnamon Whisky

In this episode, Yoel and Mickey tackle problems of tone and incivility in online discussions of the scientific literature. What constitutes bullying and is the term abused to derail legitimate criticism? What is an ad hominem attack and when is it a fallacy? Finally, who's our favorite member of the Black Goat podcast?Links:When the Revolution Came for Amy Cuddy - The New York TimesHere’s How Cornell Scientist Brian Wansink Turned Shoddy Data Into Viral Studies About How We EatSome Points On Bullying, Attacks and CriticismSimone Schnall's replication responseIssues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions | PNAS — Scientists are often protected by academic freedom, and in the United States, individuals are afforded First Amendment rights for free speech. However, freedoms are not immune to legal or social recourse, as in the case where a biotech chief executive officer was convicted of wire fraud for a misleading press release about a product (88). Individuals engaging in ad hominem attacks in scientific discourse should be subject to censure.No, we can't censure people for ad hominem attacks in scientific discourse. |Stop accusing me of ad hominem fallacies you stupid idiots | The Logic of SciencePsychMAPPsychMADSanjay's blogSimine's blogThe Black Goat – A podcast about doing scienceWheat — Side Launch Brewing CompanyGreat Lakes Brewery - Octopus Wants to Fight IPA

In their first episode, Yoel and Mickey tackle the alleged free speech crisis on campus. Is there reason to worry or are reports of left-wing intolerance overblown? We take a closer look and talk about what we do and don't feel comfortable saying on campus. Also: who are we and why are we doing this?Links:The ‘campus free speech crisis’ is a myth. Here are the facts. - The Washington PostThe Skeptics are Wrong Part 1: Attitudes About Free Speech On Campus are Changing – Heterodox AcademyThe Skeptics Are Wrong Part 2: Speech Culture on Campus is Changing – Heterodox AcademyDisinvitation Database - FIRECharles Murray at MiddleburyChristina Sommers at Lewis & ClarkCollective Arts: Prophets & NomadsCollective Arts: Lunch Money