Best Danielle Kepler Podcasts (2024)

1
Episode 39: Activismus 1:13:10

3d ago1:13:10

1:13:10

In this episode, we discuss activism in science. How do political and personal values affect science? When is activism just part of the job? And should one be careful about activism in the classroom? Enjoy. Shownotes: Frisby, C. L., Redding, R. E., & O’Donohue, W. T. (2023). Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: An Introduction. In Ideologi…

1
Episode 38 - Replicatio - II 54:58

5d ago54:58

54:58

In this episode, we continue our discussion of replications. We talk about how to analyze replication studies, which studies are worth replicating, and what is the status of replications in other scientific disciplines. Shownotes Mack, R. W. (1951). The Need for Replication Research in Sociology. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 93–94. https://…

1
Episode 37: Replicatio - I 55:11

15d ago55:11

55:11

In the next two episodes, we will discuss replication studies, which are essential to building reliable scientific knowledge. Shownotes Mack, R. W. (1951). The Need for Replication Research in Sociology. American Sociological Review, 16(1), 93–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087978 Smith, N. C. (1970). Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psycho…

1
Prologus 37: Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psychological research (N. C. Smith) 28:28

1M ago28:28

28:28

Smith, N. C. (1970). Replication studies: A neglected aspect of psychological research. American Psychologist, 25(10), 970–975. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029774By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 36: Leges Eponymae 1:11:45

29d ago1:11:45

1:11:45

In this episode, we discuss a fun mix of eponymous laws, which are laws named after individuals who postulate them. Shownotes Campbell, D. T. (1979). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(79)90048-X Merton, R. K. (1995). The Thomas Theorem and the Matthews Effe…

1
Episode 35: Praedictio Clinica Versus Statistica 1:08:16

1M ago1:08:16

1:08:16

In this final episode of the three-part series on the Philosophical Psychology lectures by Paul Meehl, we discuss lectures 6-8, which cover the ten obfuscating factors in "soft areas" of psychology and a host of advice Meehl provides for researchers, reviewers, editors, and educators on how to improve practice. Shownotes Krefeld-Schwalb, A., Sugerm…

1
Episode 34: Aestimatio et Emendatio Theoriarum 1:14:07

2M ago1:14:07

1:14:07

In this episode, we continue the discussion of Meehl's Philosophy of Psychology course, focusing on lectures 3, 4, and 5. Shownotes The quote "Don't make a mockery of honest ad-hockery" is probably from Clark Glymour: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Glymour Good, I. J. (1965). The Estimation of Probabilities: An Essay on Modern Bayesian Methods…

1
Prologus 34: Using scientific methods to resolve questions in the history and philosophy of science (Faust & Meehl) 1:02:07

2M ago1:02:07

1:02:07

Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1992). Using scientific methods to resolve questions in the history and philosophy of science: Some illustrations. Behavior Therapy, 23(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80381-8By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 33: Risicae Theoreticae et Asterisci Tabulares 59:23

2M ago59:23

59:23

Video lectures: https://meehl.umn.edu/video Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1992). Using scientific methods to resolve questions in the history and philosophy of science: Some illustrations. Behavior Therapy, 23(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80381-8 Serlin, R. C., & Lapsley, D. K. (1985). Rationality in psychological research: The g…

1
Prologus 33: Paul E. Meehl 40:22

3M ago40:22

40:22

In advance of the next three episodes discussing the Philosophical Psychology lectures by Paul E. Meehl, we present a brief reading from his autobiography in A history of psychology in autobiography. Meehl, P. E. (1989). Paul E. Meehl. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), A history of psychology in autobiography (Vol. 8, pp. 337–389). Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer…

1
Episode 32: Impartialitas 1:01:55

3M ago1:01:55

1:01:55

In this episode, we discuss objectivity and disinterestedness in science. We talk about norms, values, interests, and objectivity in research practice, peer review, and hiring decisions. Is it possible to be completely objective? Is objectivity a feature of epistemic products or epistemic processes? And most importantly, how would you objectively r…

1
Episode 31: Criticismus 1:15:58

3M ago1:15:58

1:15:58

In this episode, we discuss the role of criticism in science. When is criticism constructive as opposed to obsessive? What are the features of fair and useful scientific criticism? And should we explicitly teach junior researchers to both give and accept criticism? Shownotes: Babbage, C. (1830). Reflections on the Decline of Science in England: And…

1
Episode 30: Theoria Aedificans - Pars II 56:27

4M ago56:27

56:27

In this episode, we continue discussing Dubin’s 8-step method for theory building. We discuss the measurement of theoretical constructs, using logical propositions to make falsifiable predictions from theories, and the importance of specifying boundary conditions. Shownotes Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Theory Construction and Model-building Sk…

1
Episode 29: Theoria Aedificans - Pars I 52:26

4M ago52:26

52:26

In this episode we discussed the 8-step method of theory building proposed by Robin Dubin in his classic 1969 book Theory Building. Shownotes Dubin, R. (1969). Theory building. Free Press. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/api/volumes/oclc/160506.html Lynham, S. A. (2002). Quantitative Research and Theory Building: Dubin’s Method. Advances in Developin…

1
Episode 28: Scientia Cumulativa 1:12:04

5M ago1:12:04

1:12:04

In this episode, we discuss the barriers to cumulative science, including inconsistent measurement tools, overreliance on single studies, and the large volume of research publications. Can replications, interdisciplinary collaborations, and prospective meta-analyses help us solve this issue? Can AI solve all our problems? And do most scientists tre…

1
Prologus 28: Chaos in the Brickyard (B. K. Forscher) 5:40

5M ago5:40

5:40

A reading of:Forscher, B. K. (1963). Chaos in the Brickyard. Science, 142(3590), 339–339. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.142.3590.339By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 27: Vocans Ictus Tuos - Pars II 59:29

5M ago59:29

59:29

In today’s episode, we continue our conversation about preregistration. How flexible can we be when we preregister, without increasing flexibility in our analysis? How well do people preregister, and what does a good preregistration look like? And how do we deal with deviations from preregistrations? Shownotes Dubin, R. (1969). Theory building. Fre…

1
Episode 26: Vocans Ictus Tuos - Pars I 1:01:34

6M ago1:01:34

1:01:34

In this two part episode we discuss the fine art of preregistration. We go back into the history of preregistration, its evolution, and current use. Do we preregister to control the Type 1 error rate, or to show that we derived our prediction from theory a priori? Can and should we preregister exploratory or secondary data analysis? And how severe …

1
Episode 25: Reverentia Ad Auctoritatem 51:23

6M ago51:23

51:23

In the first episode of 2024, we discuss the double-edged sword: reverence to authority. Should scientists respect others on whose shoulders they stand? Or should they be wary of appeal to authority? How should scientists deal with other sources of authority in science, like for example, the government or academic societies? And how can we differen…

1
Prologus 25: The Fixation of Belief (C. S. Peirce) 32:52

6M ago32:52

32:52

The Fixation of Belief. Charles S. Peirce. Popular Science Monthly 12 (November 1877), 1-15. http://peirce.org/writings/p107.htmlBy Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 24: Contra Creativitatem Epistolae - Pars II 42:20

7M ago42:20

42:20

In this second installment of The Anticreativity Letters, we continue discussing the Tempter's tactics for stifling creativity and how to overcome them.By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 23: Contra Creativitatem Epistolae - Pars I 48:07

7M ago48:07

48:07

In the first of a two-part episode, we discuss The Anticreativity Letters by Richard Nisbett, in which a senior "tempter" advises a junior tempter on ways to prevent a young psychologist from being a productive and creative scientist. Nisbett, R. E. (1990). The anticreativity letters: Advice from a senior tempter to a junior tempter. American Psych…

1
Prologus 23: The Anticreativity Letters (R. E. Nisbett) 35:55

7M ago35:55

35:55

A reading of: Nisbett, R. E. (1990). The anticreativity letters: Advice from a senior tempter to a junior tempter. American Psychologist, 45(9), 1078–1082. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.9.1078By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 22: Magisterium 57:28

8M ago57:28

57:28

In today’s episode, we discuss the role of mentorship in academia. What are the characteristics of a good mentor-mentee relationship? What are the qualities of good mentors and good mentees? Does mentorship play a role in the development of scientific knowledge? And could mentors and mentees benefit from couples therapy? Note: D.I.H.C is pronounced…

1
Episode 21: Verifica Sed Confide 55:08

8M ago55:08

55:08

In this episode, we discuss the role of trust in science. Why should we verify but trust other scientists? What are the prerequisites for building trust within the scientific community? Who is ultimately responsible for verifying our claims and practices that bolster those claims? And should we give personality tests to everyone who enters academia…

1
Prologus 21: Role of Trust in Knowledge (J. Hardwig) 46:57

8M ago46:57

46:57

In advance of our episode Verify but Trust, a reading of John Hardwig's paper The Role of Trust in Science. Hardwig, J. (1991). The role of trust in knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy, 88(12), 693–708.By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 20: Recensio Aequalium 1:12:06

8M ago1:12:06

1:12:06

In today’s episode, we discuss the peer review process---its history, its present, and its future. How does peer review work? How long has it existed in its current form? Should reviews be open and signed? Should reviewers be paid for their hard labor? Should we just abandon the peer review process, or does it have a positive role to play? Shownote…

1
Episode 19: Quantifauxcation 1:18:33

9M ago1:18:33

1:18:33

In this episode, we discuss Quantifauxcation, described by statistician Philip Stark as “situations in which a number is, in effect, made up, and then is given credence merely because it is quantitative.” We give examples of quantifauxcation in psychology, including errors of the third kind. We spend the second half of the podcast discussing how to…

1
Prologus 19: Problem-Centering vs. Mean-Centering in Science (A. H. Maslow) 25:23

9M ago25:23

25:23

By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 18: Vitia Vocationalis 1:15:02

9M ago1:15:02

1:15:02

In today’s episode, we discuss intellectual vices. How can we tell the difference between justified confidence and unjustified arrogance? How do we deal with feelings of envy or negative comparison with other scientists? What is the difference between building one’s career and careerism? And what do we do about scientists who do not care about the …

1
Episode 17: Snobismus 1:19:51

10M ago1:19:51

1:19:51

In this episode, we discuss scientific snobbery and the ways in which it affects our interactions with and perceptions of other scientists. What are the reasons for hierarchies among different disciplines, institutions, and approaches to science? What are some ways in which snobbery manifests in science? And is it snobby to not want to present scie…

1
Episode 16: Vetus Crisi Replicatio 42:32

10M ago42:32

42:32

In this episode, we continue our conversation on the replication crisis⏤Which methodological, theoretical, and practical concerns did psychologists raise half a century ago? What has changed, and what remains the same, during the current crisis? Shownotes Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular …

1
Prologus 16: Investigator Data Analysis Effect (T. X. Barber) 50:55

11M ago50:55

50:55

Reading of the chapter "Investigator Data Analysis Effect" from the book: Barber, T. X. (1976). Pitfalls in Human Research: Ten Pivotal Points. Pergamon Press.By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 15: Novum Crisi Replicati 55:42

11M ago55:42

55:42

In this episode, we discuss the replication crisis in psychology which has been an important topic of discussion for the last decade. We revisit some key events from the start of the replication crisis, such as the publication of Daryl Bem's studies on precognition, the paper False Positive Psychology, and the Reproducibility Project and share pers…

1
Episode 14: Capax Mentis 1:04:34

11M ago1:04:34

1:04:34

In this episode we reflect on the role of intelligence in scientist. How much does intelligence matter in science, and which other characteristics might play a role in doing good science? Do scientist need to be extremely intelligent or can anyone do science? And what is the role of stupidity in science? Capax Mentis roughly translates to "capacity…

1
Prologus 14: How can I tell if I am cut out to be a scientific research worker? (P. B. Medawar) 15:28

12M ago15:28

15:28

As prologue to the next episode on how smart one needs to be to be a scientist, we present a reading of chapter 2 "How can I tell if I am cut out to be a scientific research worker?" by Peter B. Medawar from his 1979 book 'Advice to a young scientist'. Our next episode was inspired by the section "Am I brainy enough to be a scientist?" https://www.…

1
Episode 13: Chmess 1:04:51

12M ago1:04:51

1:04:51

In this episode we discuss Daniel Dennett's distinction between chess, or research worth doing, and 'chmess,' research not worth doing. We discuss ways to determine whether our research is chess or chmess, and how to avoid being sucked into lines of research we don't particularly care about. Shownotes Dennett, D. C. (2006). Higher-order truths abou…

1
Prologus 13: Chmess (D. C. Dennett) 13:55

12M ago13:55

13:55

As prologue to the next episode on Chmess, we present a reading of a paper by Daniel C. Dennett: Dennett, D. C. (2006). Higher-order truths about chmess. Topoi, 25, 39–41.By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 12: Virtutes Vocationalis 1:26:43

1y ago1:26:43

1:26:43

In today's episode, we discuss vocational virtues⸺scientific principles that should guide the behavior of scientists. We discuss whether we agree with values put forth by numerous scientists, including Ivan Pavlov, Peter Medawar, Santiago Ramón y Cajal, Barry Schwartz, among others, and share our own. Correction: At 56:24, Smriti mentions the book …

1
Prologus 12: Science, Scholarship, and Intellectual Virtues (B.J. Schwartz) 34:17

1y ago34:17

34:17

As prologue to the next episode on vocational virtues, we present a reading of a paper by Barry Schwartz: Schwartz, B. (2022). Science, scholarship, and intellectual virtues: A guide to what higher education should be like. Journal of Moral Education, 51(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2020.1772211 (Published online: 19 Jun 2020) You ca…

1
Episode 11: Inquisitionis Vastum 1:10:29

1y ago1:10:29

1:10:29

In this episode, we discuss the topic of research waste. We discuss what it is it that is being wasted and whether we waste fewer scientific resources and talent through coordination, team science, and better planning. Shownotes Bacon, New Atlantis, 1626: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2434/2434-h/2434-h.htm Dennett, D. C. (2006). Higher-order tru…

1
Prologus 11: The Efficiency of Scientific Research (J.D. Bernal) 1:34:14

1y ago1:34:14

1:34:14

In this bonus episode, Daniël reads Chapter 5 of John Desmond Bernal’s book The Social Function of Science, entitled The Efficiency of Scientific Research in preparation of our upcoming podcast episode on research waste. You can read The Social Function of Science by Bernal at the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.1880…

1
Episode 10: Probatio Significativitatis Hypothesis Nihili 1:23:06

1y ago1:23:06

1:23:06

Shownotes Wilson, E. B. (1923). The Statistical Significance of Experimental Data. Science, 58(1493), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.58.1493.93 van Dongen, N. N. N., & van Grootel, L. (2021). Overview on the Null Hypothesis Significance Test. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hwk4n Stark, P. B., & Saltelli, A. (2018). Cargo‐cult statistics a…

1
Episode 9: Praeiudicium Publicandi 1:07:02

1y ago1:07:02

1:07:02

In this episode, we discuss the issue of publication bias. We discuss issues like: Do we learn anything from null results, given the current state of research practices? Is poorly done research still worth sharing with the scientific community? And how can we move toward a system where null results are informative and worth publishing? Shownotes Bo…

1
Episode 8: Scientia Cultus Sarcinarum 1:03:05

1y ago1:03:05

1:03:05

In this episode, we discuss physicist Richard Feynman’s famous speech ‘Cargo Cult Science,’ which refers to work that has all the affectations of science without the actual application of the scientific method. We also discuss topics like: What is pathological science? How might cargo cult science and pathological be different from pseudo-science? …

1
Prologus 8: Cargo Cult Science (R.P. Feynman) 22:34

1y ago22:34

22:34

In this bonus episode, we present a reading of the famous speech by physicist Richard Feynman on "science that isn't science," Cargo Cult Science, which will be the topic of the next episode. Enjoy.By Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakens

1
Episode 7: Corpora Regulatoria 58:24

1y ago58:24

58:24

In this episode we discuss regulatory bodies their influence on the generation and dissemination of knowledge. Should regulatory bodies have the authority to affect the topics and methods of science? Is more highly regulated research actually better? And should we just give up on our own lines of research and become potato researchers? Shownotes Ki…

1
Episode 6: Consentio 52:19

1y ago52:19

52:19

In this episode, we discuss the importance of consensus in science, both as means of establishing true knowledge and for determining which research questions might be worth pursuing. We also discuss barriers to reaching consensus and the different frameworks that are currently employed for trying to reach consensus among important stakeholders. Sho…

1
Episode 5: Insanabile Scribendi Cacoethes 1:02:39

1+ y ago1:02:39

1:02:39

In this episode, we discuss the insatiable itch to publish, starting with a quote from 1927 by sociologist Clarence Case on the dictum “Publish or perish.” We discuss ways in which individual goals to publish conflict with the broader scientific goal of producing useful knowledge. We also question the assumptions behind the notion that publishing l…

1
Episode 4: Eminentia 58:51

1+ y ago58:51

58:51

In this episode, we discuss the role of eminence in science. What ask questions like: What makes scientists eminent? What role does eminence play in science? Can eminence be spread across scientific teams instead of individuals? And how can we recognize and applaud scientists for their contributions, while avoiding conferring too many benefits on s…

Podcasts Worth a Listen

Danielle Kepler Podcasts

Podcasts Worth a Listen

Quick Reference Guide