Nullius in Verba - podcast cover

Nullius in Verba

Smriti Mehta and Daniël Lakensnulliusinverba.podbean.com
Nullius in Verba is a podcast about science—what it is and what it could be. It is hosted by Smriti Mehta from UC Berkeley and Daniël Lakens from Eindhoven University of Technology. We draw inspiration from the book Novum Organum, written in 1620 by Francis Bacon, which laid the foundations of the modern scientific method. Our logo is an homage to the title page of Novum Organum, which depicts a galleon passing between the mythical Pillars of Hercules on either side of the Strait of Gibraltar, which have been smashed by Iberian sailors to open a new world for exploration. Just as this marks the exit from the well-charted waters of the Mediterranean into the Atlantic Ocean, Bacon hoped that empirical investigation will similarly smash the old scientific ideas and lead to a greater understanding of the natural world. The title of the podcast comes from the motto of the Royal Society, set in typeface Kepler by Robert Slimbach. Our theme song is Newton’s Cradle by Grandbrothers.

Episodes

Episode 36: Leges Eponymae

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 Effect. Social Forces, 74(2), 379–422. Stigler, S. M. (1980). Stigler’s Law of Eponymy*. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 39(1 Series II)...

Jun 14, 20241 hr 12 minSeason 1Ep. 36

Episode 35: Praedictio Clinica Versus Statistica

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., Sugerman, E. R., & Johnson, E. J. (2024). Exposing omitted moderators: Explaining why effect sizes differ in the social sciences. Proceedings of the Nat...

May 31, 20241 hr 8 minSeason 1Ep. 35

Episode 34: Aestimatio et Emendatio Theoriarum

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. M.I.T. Press. Shepard, R. N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science, 237(4820), 1317–1323....

May 17, 20241 hr 14 minSeason 1Ep. 34

Episode 33: Risicae Theoreticae et Asterisci Tabulares

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 good-enough principle. American Psychologist, 40(1), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.1.73 Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and amend...

May 03, 202459 minSeason 2Ep. 33

Prologus 33: Paul E. Meehl

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 University Press.

Apr 26, 202440 minEp. 33

Episode 32: Impartialitas

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 rate this podcast? Shownotes Armstrong, J. S. (1979). Advocacy and objectivity in science. Management Science, 25(5), 423–428. Declaration of Interest ...

Apr 19, 20241 hr 2 minSeason 1Ep. 32

Episode 31: Criticismus

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 on Some of Its Causes. Prasad, Vinay, and John PA Ioannidis. "Constructive and obsessive criticism in science." European journal of clinical investig...

Apr 05, 20241 hr 16 minSeason 1Ep. 31

Episode 30: Theoria Aedificans - Pars II

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 Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists. Guilford Press. McGuire, W. J. (1973). The yin and yang of progress in social psychology: Seven koa...

Mar 22, 202456 minSeason 1Ep. 30

Episode 29: Theoria Aedificans - Pars I

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 Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 242–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/15222302004003003 Elms, A. C. (1975). The crisis of confidence in social psychology. America...

Mar 08, 202452 minSeason 1Ep. 29

Episode 28: Scientia Cumulativa

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 treat their theories like toothbrushes? Shownotes Opening quote by George Sarton Sarton, G. (1927). Introduction to the History of Science (Vol. 376). Is...

Feb 23, 20241 hr 12 minSeason 1Ep. 28

Episode 27: Vocans Ictus Tuos - Pars II

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. Free Press. His full quote is: "There is no more devastating commendation that the self-designated theorist makes of the researcher than to label his wor...

Feb 09, 202459 minSeason 1Ep. 27

Episode 26: Vocans Ictus Tuos - Pars I

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 is the issue of severe testing? Shownotes ClinicalTrials.gov You can preregister on AsPredicted and the OSF Johnson, M. (1975). Models of Control and ...

Jan 26, 20241 hr 2 minSeason 1Ep. 26

Episode 25: Reverentia Ad Auctoritatem

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 differentiate true expertise from mere authority? Enjoy. Shownotes Frank, P. (1956). The role of authority in the interpretation of science. Synthese, 10, 335...

Jan 12, 202451 minSeason 1Ep. 23

Episode 23: Contra Creativitatem Epistolae - Pars I

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 Psychologist, 45(9), 1078–1082. BMJ Christmas issue: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-authors/article-types/christmas-issue Quote by Ira Glass: http...

Dec 15, 202348 minSeason 1Ep. 23

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

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.45.9.1078

Dec 08, 202336 minEp. 22

Episode 22: Magisterium

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 'dick' but this is meant to be a family-friendly podcast :) Shownotes https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/emotional-fitness/201303/10-things-your...

Dec 01, 202357 minSeason 1Ep. 22

Episode 21: Verifica Sed Confide

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? Shownotes Hardwig, J. (1991). The role of trust in knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy, 88(12), 693–708. Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., Bromme, R. (20...

Nov 17, 202355 minSeason 1Ep. 21

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

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.

Nov 10, 202347 min

Episode 20: Recensio Aequalium

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? Shownotes Peer Community in Registered Reports: https://rr.peercommunityin.org/ Suggestion to Darwin to publish a book about pigeons instead of The Origins of...

Nov 03, 20231 hr 12 minSeason 1Ep. 20

Episode 19: Quantifauxcation

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 develop quantitative measures that are meaningful and bridge the divide between qualitative and quantitative observations. Shownotes Statistics text...

Oct 20, 20231 hr 19 minSeason 1Ep. 19

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

In preparation for a discussion on Quantifauxcation, a reading of 'Problem-Centering vs. Means-Centering in Science' by Abraham H. Maslow (1946). Maslow, A. H. (1946). Problem-Centering vs. Means-Centering in Science. Philosophy of Science, 13(4), 326–331. https://doi.org/10.1086/286907

Oct 13, 202325 minSeason 1Ep. 19

Episode 18: Vitia Vocationalis

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 truth? Shownotes Azrin, N. H., Holz, W., Ulrich, R., & Goldiamond, I. (1961). The control of the content of conversation through reinforcement. Jo...

Oct 06, 20231 hr 15 minSeason 1Ep. 18

Episode 17: Snobismus

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 scientific posters? Enjoy. Shownotes: Ego and Math (3Blue1Brown) M. V. Berry; Regular and irregular motion. AIP Conf. Proc. 15 September 1978; 46 (1): 16–...

Sep 22, 20231 hr 20 minSeason 1Ep. 17

Episode 16: Vetus Crisi Replicatio

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 reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17(11), 776–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043424 Rosenthal, R. (19...

Sep 08, 202343 minSeason 1Ep. 16

Episode 15: Novum Crisi Replicati

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 personal anecdotes about how it was to live through the replication crisis. Shownotes: Bem, D. J. (2011). Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for an...

Aug 25, 202356 minEp. 15
For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android
Open in Metacast