hatzilim / tags / interviews

Tagged with “interviews” (2)

  1. Podcast – Bad Science Part 2: Cogs in the Machine – PeerJ Blog

    (Listen to Bad Science Part 1 here)

    Cogs in the machine

    PeerJ co-founder Jason Hoyt speaks with Cardiff University psychology professor Chris Chambers in this ongoing series on “Bad Science.”


    0:05 – The widening division between science and the public

    Part 1: Reproducibility vs Playing the Game (01:25)

    1:55 – Selling stories to get into top journals

    7:30 – Hitting roadblocks as a young researcher

    9:44 – Origins of registered reports

    13:44 – Old guard vs registered reports

    16:15 – Is Open Science bad for your career?

    19:15 – The academic training system needs to be rebuilt / Reproducibility Network

    22:50 – Max Weber and Academic Careerism

    Part 2: Science & Politics (31:05)

    31:30 – Post-WW2 science funding explosion and unintended consequences

    32:45 – Providing research to politicians

    34:57 – It’s not our job to hold back knowledge

    40:05 – Failure to engage

    43:05 – Technocracy vs Democracy

    46:59 – Remembering why we do science

    52:39 – Closing

    LINKSChris Chambers on TwitterChris at Cardiff University


    The Seven Deadly Sins of Psychology: A Manifesto for Reforming the Culture of Scientific Practice by Chris Chambers On Amazon

    Florian Markowetz. Five selfish reasons to work reproducibly. Genome Biology. 2015 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0850-7

    Munafò et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behaviour. 2017. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021

    American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer by Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin (2006 Pulitzer Prize for Biography or Autobiography)


    Original music by Jeremy Sherman. Licensed(73171-MTR-108920). www.neosounds.com/songs/2491


    —Huffduffed by hatzilim

  2. Bad Science Part 1: Jason Hoyt speaks with Professor Dorothy Bishop – PeerJ Blog

    In this multipart series on bad science, PeerJ co-founder Jason Hoyt speaks with University of Oxford Professor Dorothy Bishop about the pressures to publish great results, p-hacking, registered reports, and open science.

    1:50 – When she first learned how pervasive p-hacking was

    6:30 – PeerJ Preprint “Distinguishing polemic from commentary in science” – cherry-picking data. Pseudoscience of wifi causing autism.

    10:17 – At what point do we have enough red flags to call it bad science?

    13:30 – Battle against pseudoscience as a weapon

    15:33 – Career suicide if you point out errors in science + Diederik Stapel

    18:25 – Your reputation. Everybody knows who to trust, or not trust – even if they don’t admit it.

    21:00 – Pressure to publish; academic careerism; Nobel Laureates at LMB Cambridge.

    26:08 – Grants and short-term contracts. US vs UK funding. Contributing to bad science.

    29:38 – Way out could be reproducible science; registered reports

    39:33 – Bad science as an epidemic

    LINKSDorothy Bishop on Twitter (@deevybee)Dorothy Bishop’s BlogPeerJ on TwitterJason Hoyt on Twitter


    Grimes DR, Bishop DV. (2017) Distinguishing polemic from commentary in science: Some guidelines illustrated with the case of Sage and Burgio, 2017. PeerJ Preprints 5:e3355v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3355v1

    Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel [PDF]

    Montgomery, K., & Oliver, AL. (2017). Conceptualizing Fraudulent Studies as Viruses: New Models for Handling Retractions. MINERVA, 55(1), 49-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9311-z Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0m85502m


    Original music by Jeremy Sherman.

    Licensed(73171-MTR-108920). https://www.neosounds.com/songs/2491


    —Huffduffed by hatzilim