Andrew Devendorf joins Alexa and Yoel to discuss his work on "me-search" (or self-relevant research) within clinical psychology. He talks about the prevalence of mental health difficulties within the field, and the harmful taboos against speaking openly about them. And, he shares his own reasons for studying depression and suicide, and how he has been discouraged from citing personal experience as a motivation for his work. Their conversation also explores common misconceptions about mental illness, strengths of self-relevant research, and ways to be more supportive to those facing mental health challenges. In the end, Yoel and Alexa fail to resolve their debate about the existence of the "unbiased researcher."
Special Guest: Andrew Devendorf.
Links:
Playing devil's advocate, Yoel and Mickey mount a criticism against the scientific study of mindfulness. What is mindfulness? Can we measure it? Is mindfulness-based therapy effective? Can mindfulness improve the quality of attention beyond the meditation cushion? Are effects of mindfulness mostly placebo effects produced by motivated practitioners and adherents? Should we be impressed by mindfulness meditation’s supposed effects on conceptions of the self? Is mindfulness, in all its complexity, amenable to scientific study?
\n\nBonus: Is the value of diversity and inclusivity a core part of open science?
\n\nThis is a re-release of an episode first released on August 7, 2019.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa are joined by Joe Simmons to talk about fraud. We go in-depth on a recent high-profile fraud case, but we also talk about scientific fraud more generally: how common is it, how do you detect it, and what can we do to prevent it?
\n\nThis is a re-release of Episode 73, originally released on September 29, 2021.
Special Guest: Joe Simmons.
Links:
Jennifer Gutsell joins Alexa to discuss the controversy surrounding Yoel's experience interviewing at UCLA. They focus on a post, written by Alexa, in which she pushes back against defenses of "viewpoint diversity" and argues that the graduate petition advocating for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) was a brave effort that should be taken seriously. Jennifer elaborates on these ideas, suggesting that there are some views that are not up for debate, and emphasizing the care that is required when having theoretical discussions without a personal stake in the matter. Alexa and Jennifer go on to connect these ideas to a paper written by Kevin Durrheim in which he proposes that psychology's emphasis on our progressive accomplishments silences the deeper reality of racism within our field.
Special Guest: Jennifer Gutsell.
Links:
Harkening back to episode 73, Alexa and Yoel discuss recent evidence of fraud documented in the Data Colada blog post "Clusterfake." The post is the first in a series of four, which will collectively detail evidence of fraud in four papers co-authored by Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino. First, the co-hosts dive into the details, with Alexa soberly (in both senses of the word) explaining the revelations of calcChain. They go on to discuss the potential impact of these findings for collaborators, some of whom have begun conducting audits of work co-authored with Gino. In addition, they speculate about ways to reduce fraud that could relieve some of the burden from those who currently do this time-consuming and often thankless work. Finally, they consider what this means for a field still struggling to build a more trustworthy foundation.
Links:
In heated political debates, people are often accused of being hypocrites, lacking consistent foundational values. Today, Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent paper by David Pinsof, David Sears, and Martie Haselton, that challenges the commonsense notion that political belief systems stem from our core values. Instead, the authors propose that people form alliances with others, and develop political beliefs that serve to maintain those alliances. The cohosts discuss how these alliances might form, the various biases used to defend them, and whether values are truly absent from the process. They also tackle the deeper question of whether the alliance model means that neither side is right or wrong.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent paper that takes a machine learning approach to estimating the replicability of psychology as a discipline. The researchers' investigation begins with a training process, in which an artificial intelligence model identifies ways that textual descriptions differ for studies that pass versus fail manual replication tests. This model is then applied to a set of 14,126 papers published in six well-known psychology journals over the past 20 years, picking up on the textual markers that it now recognizes as signals of replicable findings. In a mysterious twist, these markers remain hidden in the black box of the algorithm. However, the researchers hand-examine a few markers of their own, testing whether things like subfield, author expertise, and media interest are associated with the replicability of findings. And, as if machine learning models weren't juicy enough, Yoel trolls Alexa with an intro topic hand-selected to infuriate her.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel chat with Paul Bloom about his newest book, Psych: The Story of the Human Mind. The book, built from Paul's popular Introduction to Psychology course, is an opinionated overview of the field of psychology but also a window into his deep fascination with the mind. Yoel and Alexa spend some time picking Paul's brain, inquiring about writing, and teaching, and how to avoid boredom. But Paul has a few questions of his own, challenging the cohosts to consider what their own version of Psych would look like. In the process, their conversation ranges from Freudian dream content, to the limitations of psychology, to the (glaring omission of) the anatomy of the inner ear.
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
Andrew Devendorf joins Alexa and Yoel to discuss his work on "me-search" (or self-relevant research) within clinical psychology. He talks about the prevalence of mental health difficulties within the field, and the harmful taboos against speaking openly about them. And, he shares his own reasons for studying depression and suicide, and how he has been discouraged from citing personal experience as a motivation for his work. Their conversation also explores common misconceptions about mental illness, strengths of self-relevant research, and ways to be more supportive to those facing mental health challenges. In the end, Yoel and Alexa fail to resolve their debate about the existence of the "unbiased researcher."
Special Guest: Andrew Devendorf.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel discuss the much trodden topic of implicit bias from a less trodden perspective: that of the general public. Offering insight into the public's views is a paper by Jeffrey Yen, Kevin Durrheim, and Romin Tafarodi, which explores public thinking about the implicit association test (IAT) through an examination of the New York Times comments section. These comments demonstrate varying reactions to the idea that negative associations with some identities - racial and otherwise - can bubble beneath the surface of our explicit attitudes. Some dismiss the IAT as "academic abstraction," while others see their scores as an opportunity for confession, or even absolution. Still others embrace the role of troll, a topic foreshadowed by our discussion of the proposed overhauling of New College of Florida.
Links:
Yoel and special guest Rachel Hartman discuss the recent ouster of Klaus Fiedler, the former Editor in Chief of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science, over allegations of racism and abuse of power. They try to untangle a complicated story of peer review gone awry, explain the dueling open letters condemning and supporting Fiedler, and critically evaluate the allegations against him as well as the process that led to his dismissal as EIC. Along the way, they also talk about wine spritzers and journal prestige.
Special Guest: Rachel Hartman.
Links:
In a recent article, psychologists Webb and Tangney document their experience collecting psychology data online using Amazon's crowdsourcing platform MTurk. Alarmingly, the authors conclude that ultimately only 2.6% of their sample was valid data from human beings. Yoel and Alexa weigh in on these findings, discussing what researchers can reasonably expect from online studies and platforms, and how their personal experiences have informed their own practices. They also consider a response written by Cuskley and Sulik, who argue that researchers, not recruitment platforms, are responsible for ensuring the quality of data collected online. Questions that arise include: What studies do people want to do? Does anyone read the fine print? And what are the ethics of mouse-hunting?
Links:
Yoel and Alexa are joined by Spencer Greenberg, founder of the behavioral science startup incubator Spark Wave and host of the Clearer Thinking podcast. He describes how he became fascinated with psychology and behavior change, and how he's been working to provide empirically-backed strategies for everday tasks, like making decisions or forming habits. He also offers an alternative perspective on open science, arguing that a phenomenon he calls "importance hacking" has been overshadowed by p-hacking in calls for science reform. Greenberg further challenges the Alexa and Yoel to consider whether the "open scientist" will fall short of what can only be achieved by the truly "inspired scientist." Finally, Spenccer has a major project in the works, and he gives us the honor of the big reveal.
Special Guest: Spencer Greenberg.
Links:
With grad school application deadlines around the corner, Alexa and Yoel discuss how, exactly, that process works. Big picture, they talk about their goals in selecting graduate students to work on their labs, and whether they've gotten good at the process. They also examine typical application requirements - including recommendation letters, personal statements, GPAs, and (sometimes) the GRE - and consider which they'd keep, and which they'd prefer to never deal with again.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent paper, written by Hughes, Srivastava, Leszko, and Condon, that created and validated a new index of "occupational prestige." The index is intended to provide a tool to measure the third component of socioeconomic status, alongside income and education. The cohosts consider how occupational prestige might lead to differential treatment, or even unrealistic expectations ("is anyone in this hotel a doctor?"). Digging deeper, they discuss the paper's exploration of ways that prestige tracks with the physical, critical thinking, and interpersonal demands of a profession. Finally, they realize that as a "former social neuroscientist," Alexa hasn't been getting the respect she deserves.
Links:
Paul Bloom joins Yoel and Alexa to talk about the glamour and humiliation of teaching psychology at the college level. They discuss how they've changed their approaches to teaching over the years, and whether they've become more skilled or more out of touch (or both). Alexa shares her experiences teaching about morality and evolution to a predominantly Christian student body, Yoel laments the fact that his students aren't more disagreeable, and Paul claims that critical thinking is overrated. In an era of increasing remote instruction, they claim that online courses can't do what they do. But, only Yik Yak knows for sure.
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
Inspired by a recent Atlantic article ("The Myth of Independent American Families" by Stephanie H. Murray) Alexa and Yoel consider what it means to live in an indiviualistic society. At an abstract level, they discuss different visions for interdependence, from communes to church communities to welfare states. On a more personal note, they reflect on ways that they depend on, and support, people in their families and communities, and whether it would be desirable to increase those levels of reliance. They also consider the domains of romantic relationships (should we feel like we're free to leave at any time?) and college education (how affordable should it be?). And, Yoel explains his beef with student loan forgiveness.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa are joined by Stefan Uddenberg, a social perception researcher and author of the paper "Deep Models of Superficial Face Judgments." This paper was the focus of a previous episde - "A Face for Podcasting" - in which the co-hosts discussed the research, and the resulting controversy. Now, Stefan offers a new, insider perspective. He begins by offering a deeper explanation of the work, noting that a large, diverse set of facial images, is essential for studying how people are unfairly judged based on appearance (e.g., their race and gender). He also recounts the outrage on Twitter and somehow finds lessons to be learned from even the harshest and most misinformed attacks. In an unexpected twist, Yoel and Alexa discover Stefan's hidden talent.
Special Guest: Stefan Uddenberg.
Links:
As the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) starts gearing up for their 2023 conference, Alexa and Yoel debate some of the organization's recent efforts to be more anti-racist and politically engaged. First, the co-hosts discuss debate over moving the conference from its originally scheduled location (Atlanta, Georgia) due to the state's restrictive abortion laws. They consider how boycotting (or, as SPSP ultimately decided, not boycotting) fits with the organization's mission and identity. Second, they examine SPSP's new submission evaluation criteria, which reward submissions for promoting equity, inclusion, and anti-racism. Yoel and Alexa are largely divided on both topics, but Yoel provides at least one improvement they can agree on.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa chat with Jennifer Cox and Lauren Kois, co-directors of the Southern Behavioral Health and Law Initiative. Established in 2020, the initiative was created to address the dearth of mental health resources for people who become involved with the legal system. Jennifer and Lauren walk our co-hosts through common scenarios that can occur when a person with mental illness encounters the legal system, some of which involve long waits in understaffed state hospitals with little access to basic mental health resources. They also describe various efforts to ameliorate these problems, including their own work to optimize use of the 988 mental health emergency line in Alabama. In the process, they offer hope for researchers who aim to effect policy change without becoming mired in political polarization. And, they challenge future guests to a deadlifting contest.
Special Guests: Jennifer Cox and Lauren Kois.
Links:
Independent researcher Aella joins Yoel and Alexa to talk about her experiences doing freelance social science. Their discussion touches on some far-ranging topics, from the upsides of Twitter microfame to the humbling experience of questioning one's faith. At one point, they consider the compromises - good and bad - that come from catering to one's critics. Aella also discusses a recent funded research project where she asks people about their sexual fetishes.
Special Guest: Aella.
Links:
Mickey returns with the hot takes you know and love. He joins Yoel and Alexa to discuss Jonathan Haidt's recent Atlantic article, "Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid." Haidt claims the answer is social media, but the cohosts aren't fully convinced. To shed a bit more light on the matter, they turn to an article by Amy Orben and Andrew Przybylski which provides a rigorous analysis of the relationship between social media use and well-being. In the end, Mickey admits to being a hypocrite, and Alexa makes a plug for Big Potato.
Links:
Earlier this year, the last of five "Many Labs" projects was accepted for publication at Collabra: Psychology, representating the culmination of a nearly-decade long series of multi-lab replication efforts. In this episode, Alexa and Yoel consider what they've learned from Many Labs 1 through 5, including insights about replication, expertise, and the impact (or lack thereof) of small effects. They also discuss their own connections to the project - Yoel as an original author, and Alexa as a researcher examing psychologists' reactions to the findings. Although the co-hosts deny they have any existential fear of death (see Many Labs 4) they do share their most recent life-threatening experiences.
Links:
Originating within the behavioral sciences, "nudging" has received attention as a way to achieve broad societal change by promoting small, individual adjustments. We're told, for instance, that if we all do our part reduce our carbon footprints we can stave off climate change. In today's episode, Yoel and Alexa consider a critique of "nudging" offered by Chater and Loewenstein. These authors argue that individual-level interventions often fail to accumulate to impressive societal change, and meanwhile distract from much needed system-level solutions. Also, Yoel claims to be less relatable than Alexa.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent study that examines the facial features that people perceive as "smart," "dorky," "trustworthy," or a number of other traits. The study quickly captured a lot of attention, eliciting both fascination and anger. The cohosts turn to Twitter, and to Alexa's undergraduate students, to attempt to gain a deeper understanding of the criticisms and suspicions expressed about the work. In the process, they consider whether glasses make you look smart, and whether babies can be trusted.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Originally, Yoel and Alexa set out to discuss a study examining stress and decision-making during the pandemic. However, they get sidetracked by the ways that data are packaged - first by APA, and then by NPR - into a newsworthy account that may not tell the whole story. They identify ways in which the summary statements and headlines may exaggerate or twist the data into a more interesting narrative. Despite their skepticism, they consider NPR's advice about how to improve day-to-day decision-making. In a particularly humble moment, Yoel concedes that he should have known better than to buy a car without air conditioning.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Alexa and Yoel fight some more, this time over whether or not science should be value free. They consider a position taken by W. E. B. Du Bois, who argued that social change was only possible if scientists focused solely on finding truth. In the process, they consider whether scientists should ever keep findings to themselves, and discuss the merits of leaving the value judgments to the politicians. In the end, they somehow conclude that it is fine that they never justify their alphas. Next time, Alexa promises to find out what's happening on UA frat house lawns.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Alexa discuss the "grand challenges" of psychological science, as identified in a recent survey of APS members. While usually nauseatingly agreeable, the two find many points of contention when it comes to psychology's shortcomings - from the kinds of diversity worth wanting to the value of decolonizing your syllabus. In the end, they make amends by agreeing that psychological science is, unfortunately, unlikely to solve climate change. And, along the way they express their appreciation for winter sports, tax advice, and alcoholic seltzers without artificial sweeteners.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Alexa embrace their credulous sides and consider concepts from psychology that have importance for people in their private and public lives. Each of us lists the three social psychological ideas that we think are most relevant to people's lives - the kinds of things we would teach if we could give just one lecture. There are areas of consensus, but at some point Alexa wonders what Yoel has against insurance. We also discuss our inability to meaningfully discuss international politics.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Alexa moonlights as a guest and answers Yoel's questions about her recent paper, in which she argues that the criminal justice system should abandon retribution. Alexa claims that when we ask if someone is blameworthy, we are asking social scientific questions: Were they rational? Were they being coerced? Were they acting out of character? We discuss some aspects of the social scientific evidence - from vignettes about soaping windows to group-to-individual inference - and consider whether it can provide satisfying answers. And, Yoel challenges Alexa to consider whether her utopian vision might have unintended consequences.
\n\nPlus, we talk about Canadian truckers, and Alexa keeps her valentine's day collage shrouded in mystery.
Links:
Personality psychologist and methodologist Julia Rohrer joins the show to talk about causal claims, strategic ambiguity, and how tough it is to tell what empirical claims many psychology papers are making. To illustrate, we subject Yoel's first paper, "Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals," to some vigorous post-publication peer review. We also discuss what makes Julia most hopeful about psychology, as well as the recent progress in alcohol-free beer.
Special Guest: Julia Rohrer.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel talk authenticity. What is it? Is it good to have it? And why does Alexa score higher on it than Yoel? We talk about a draft paper examining how people infer authenticity in themselves and others, and a recently-published paper suggesting that supposedly highly authentic people might just be motivated to present themselves that way.
\n\nPlus, Alexa drinks some listener-supplied beer, with favorable results, and we discuss who the most famous academic is.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel are back with more amateur philosophy of science. This time, we do a deep dive into a paper by the legendary Paul Meehl: "Appraising and Amending Theories: The Strategy of Lakatosian Defense and Two Principles that Warrant It." What can this classic paper tell us about how to do better research?
\n\nWe also talk about lactose, tandem bicycles, and New Year's resolutions (not in that order).
Links:
Alexa and Yoel tackle Paul Feyerabend, the wild man of philosophy of science. What can we learn from his "anything goes" argument for methodological anarchy? We go deep on the first five chapters of Feyerabend's most famous work, "Against Method," and discuss his (maybe not entirely serious) arguments for extreme theory proliferation, ignoring the data, and Chinese herbal medicine.
\n\nAlso, we discuss which Christmas album is superior: Sia or Dolly Parton.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel talk about objections to preregistration. Does preregistration imply that researchers can't be trusted? Does it mean that they can't use their best judgment? When might preregistration be unhelpful? We also discuss researcher degrees of freedom in a recent paper testing Cardi B's maxim that "hoes don't get cold."
\n\nPlus: ketchup on ice cream, and Alexa's controversial replacement for Daylight Savings Time.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel talk about a paper purporting to show that winning the Nobel Prize increases your lifespan. In the process, they dip their toes into non-experimental causal inference and discuss whether there is a taboo in psychology about drawing causal conclusions from non-experimental data. Plus, Yoel does his best to explain what an instrumental variable is and Alexa drinks a very large beer.
Links:
Paul Bloom joins us to talk about why we want to suffer. Sometimes it's a means to an end, but sometimes we desire it for its own sake.
\n\nAmong other things, we talk about mountain-climbing, whether you'd want to run just the end of the marathon, experience machines, BDSM, and parenting.
\n\nPlus, a very special extra guest host, kidney donation, pronouns, and trigger warnings.
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
Yoel and Alexa are joined by Joe Simmons to talk about fraud. We go in-depth on a recent high-profile fraud case, but we also talk about scientific fraud more generally: how common is it, how do you detect it, and what can we do to prevent it?
Special Guest: Joe Simmons.
Links:
Danielle McDuffie is a graduate student in psychology at the University of Alabama. This is the story of how she ran a graduate student climate survey, the explosive results, and the very contentious year that ensued.
Special Guest: Danielle McDuffie.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel discuss a new paper (Oishi & Westgate, 2021) arguing that psychological richness is an overlooked aspect of the good life. In the process, they compare psychologically-rich-life scores, plan hypothetical vacations, and compare major regrets.
\n\nAlso, Alexa reviews an (accidentally-purchased) alcohol-free beer.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel tackle the most dreaded subject: getting older. Have they become better researchers and people over the years? Are they happier and more connected? Or are they just more forgetful and less good at stats?
\n\nPlus: some listener feedback about self-care raises conceptual questions about suffering.
","summary":"Alexa and Yoel tackle the most dreaded subject: getting older. Have they become better researchers and people over the years? Are they happier and more connected? Or are they just more forgetful and less good at stats?","date_published":"2021-08-11T06:00:00.000-04:00","attachments":[{"url":"https://chtbl.com/track/5195D/aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/69da8ae3-a19e-41ed-a678-0e145a936a3f/e3606748-fc13-4ad4-830b-7a56c04772a8.mp3","mime_type":"audio/mpeg","size_in_bytes":46963209,"duration_in_seconds":3881}]},{"id":"bcbb3188-728c-410c-a8d4-5fa8eff42c11","title":"Episode 69: How to Self-Care","url":"https://www.fourbeers.com/69","content_text":"Alexa and Yoel go deep on self-care. What is it, how do you do it, and why does the term raise Yoel's hackles? How hard do we actually work, and should we be trying to work less? \n\nAlso, Alexa shares an amazingly successful culinary experiment.Links:The Least Stressful Jobs Of 2013How Hard Do Professors Actually Work? - The AtlanticResearch shows professors work long hours and spend much of day in meetingsHow I Practice Self-Care as a Black Woman in Academia | TimeAcademics should make time for self-care, even if just a few minutes each day (opinion)‘Self-care’: how a radical feminist idea was stripped of politics for the mass market | André Spicer | The GuardianSlush - Prairie Artisan AlesMilkshake IPA - Microbrasserie Vox PopuliMolotov Cocktail | Evil Twin BrewingL'Espace Public – Brasseurs de quartierTwo Psychologists Four Beers - Blog - Alexa's Beer Float RecipeIslands: Natural Law Party - YouTube","content_html":"Alexa and Yoel go deep on self-care. What is it, how do you do it, and why does the term raise Yoel's hackles? How hard do we actually work, and should we be trying to work less?
\n\nAlso, Alexa shares an amazingly successful culinary experiment.
Links:
Alexa and Yoel discuss "The Anticreativity Letters," a satirical article by Richard Nisbett that advises young psychology researchers to (among other things) avoid being overly critical. How does the article's advice hold up today? How does one combine appropriate skepticism with enthusiasm for research? Or are the two in conflict at all?
\n\nPlus: Alexa gets salty about salty drinks, and Yoel returns to the gym.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Mickey and Yoel welcome repeat guest Ted Slingerland to talk about his new book "Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization," in which he makes the case for alcohol.
\n\nAlso, why are Yoel's guns out, and what was Mickey's worst trip?
Special Guest: Edward (Ted) Slingerland.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Alexa discuss progress in open science over the past 10 years. Is the scientific reform glass half-full or half-empty? Where have we made progress, and what still needs work? We use two papers describing "Scientific Utopia" by Nosek and colleagues (written nearly 10 years ago!) in order to evaluate our progress.
\n\nAlso, the true story of how Ashley Madison got its name.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Mickey, Alexa, and Yoel break down "Breaking the Social Media Prism," a new book arguing that social media reinforces our pre-existing political beliefs and polarizes us against the other side.
\n\nPlus, HUGE NEWS about who's hosting the show. Also, Yoel gets a French lesson.
Links:
Journalist and podcaster Jesse Singal joins the show to talk about the enduring popularity of social-psychological quick fixes and how they go wrong. Plus: what is wrong with how the media covers science?
Special Guest: Jesse Singal.
Links:
Neuroscientist and addiction researcher Carl Hart joins the show to talk drug legalization. Why does he think all drugs should be legal? What are some common myths about drug use and addiction? And how has his personal experience as a regular drug user influenced his views?
\n\nBonus: What drugs should we try next?
Special Guest: Carl Hart.
Links:
Lee Jussim joins the show to argue that we have been too soft on academia. We discuss problems in psychology and the social sciences including ideological bias, politically-motivated retractions, and more. Have things gotten better or worse over the past 10 years?
\n\nPlus: is Lee bad at Twitter?
Special Guest: Lee Jussim.
Links:
Psychologist Gordon Pennycook joins the show to talk bullshit and misinformation. What is bullshit, and why do some people fall for it more than others? Why does misinformation spread so readily, and what can be done to stop it?
\n\nPlus: Yoel asks some perfectly reasonable questions about COVID's origins, and Mickey indulges in some Canadian content.
Special Guest: Gordon Pennycook.
Links:
Mickey and Yoel follow up on two recent episodes ("Against Academia?" and "Racism and Sexism on Campus"). Then they review some of the less-bad aspects of 2020 and recommend some things that got them through a challenging year. Plus: what 80s band was Mickey the #1 fan of?
Links:
Psychologist Katie Kinzler joins the show to talk language. How do children and adults make judgments about people based on how they talk? Is there a "bilingual advantage"? And does Mickey sound Canadian?
\n\nBonus: When deciding whether to go to grad school, should you not do what Katie did?
Special Guest: Katherine (Katie) Kinzler.
Links:
Repeat guest Anne Wilson joins the show to talk about two recent papers about bias in psychology and on campus. Is gender and racial bias pervasive? Or are things better than many of us might think? We also discuss the recent "female mentorship" paper that's been causing quite the hubbub.
Special Guest: Anne Wilson.
Links:
Mickey and Yoel tackle the pros and cons of academia. As an academic, is it taboo to say you love your job? How hard do we work anyway? If we ran the world, how would we change academic hiring?
\n\nAlso: why do reporters call us and ask us for our opinion?
Links:
Psychologist Michael McCullough joins the show to talk forgiveness, punishment, and how we came to care about the welfare of people we don't know. Also: a listener calls out our dubious math.
Special Guest: Michael McCullough.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Psychologist and author Maria Konnikova joins the show to talk poker, life, and what one teaches you about the other. She talks with us about working with Walter Mischel as a graduate student, her decision to leave the academic track to become an author, and her latest book, The Biggest Bluff, in which she describes how she became a tournament-winning professional poker player.
\n\nBonus: who will win our round of Lodden Thinks?
Special Guest: Maria Konnikova.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey interview one of the most influential social scientists of our generation, Harvard University's Joe Henrich. Why are people from the West so peculiar, so different from other people the world over? What led the West to be particularly prosperous? If not intelligence, what marks humans as so special? What are the various approaches to the evolutionary study of human behaviour? Does psychology suffer from a theory crisis? Has religion been a net plus to the survival of human groups?
\n\nBonus: Who is lazier, psychologists or economists?
Special Guest: Joe Henrich.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Robb Willer and Simine Vazire join the podcast to debate whether social science, in its current form, can usefully contribute to our response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Is psychology ready to give trustworthy advice to policy-makers?
\n\nPlus: Yoel shirks his beer-drinking, yet again.
Special Guests: Robb Willer and Simine Vazire.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Neil Lewis, Jr. of Cornell University to the podcast. Is psychology ready to be applied to help the response to the COVID-19 pandemic? What are the opportunity costs of applying a psychological intervention? How does Neil navigate Twitter so effectively? What will Neil be doing over at FiveThirtyEight? What can meta-analyses and registered reports tell us about stereotype threat?
\n\nBonus: How is Mickey like Jesus?
Special Guest: Neil Lewis, Jr..
Links:
After over a year of (mostly) avoiding controversial topics, Yoel and Mickey dive in to talk about orthodoxy, dissent, and "cancel culture." Does the narrowing of acceptable views make us dumber or does it represent a drawing of new moral boundaries that make us more kind? How does the silencing of dissent lead to self-censoring? Why does it appear like some people are given more permission to dissent than others? Is cancel culture leading to a right-wing backlash?
\n\nBonus: Why was the podcast account suspended from Twitter?
Links:
For their 50th episode, Yoel and Mickey welcome Northwestern University psychologist Claudia Haase to the podcast to discuss relationships and mistakes. What was life like in East Germany before the fall of the Berlin wall? How can Yoel and Mickey iron out their relationship problems? How is life as a working academic and mother during a global pandemic? Why are people so scared to admit to their mistakes? How can we learn from failure?
\n\nBonus: Should you delete Twitter?
Special Guest: Claudia Haase.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey have a far ranging conversation with University of British Columbia professor of philosophy, Evan Thompson. Despite growing up with a daily meditation practice and contributing to the cognitive science of mindfulness, why does Evan not consider himself a Buddhist? Is Buddhism a religion that is truly different from other religions? Is the self an illusion, as is popularily portrayed by Buddhist modernists such as Sam Harris? What do failures to replicate social psychology studies of embodied cognition mean for the larger enterprise of embodied cognition? Can science and traditional Buddhism co-exist? Why is Evolutionary Psychology a doomed entreprise?
\n\nBonus: Which city is superior, Toronto or Vancouver?
Special Guest: Evan Thompson.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey host Rachel Ruttan, who is an assisant professor of organizational behavior and human resources at the Rotman School of Management. What is organizational behavior and how is it different from psychology? What makes for a good research idea? How is figure skating like academia? When big corporations espouse social values, does it cheapen people's commitment to these values?
\n\nBonus: What is the best way to suss out if a new friend smokes weed?
Special Guest: Rachel Ruttan.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome back returning guest Keith Maddox from Tufts University to talk about his research on racism. What is shadeism? Can anything be done to make it easier to talk about race and racism? What happens to poeple who confront racism? Has social psychology overplayed the impact of implicit prejudice? Has psychology overplayed the role of the individual racist, and not focused enough on structural racism?
Special Guest: Keith Maddox.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey try to settle their feud with the boys from Very Bad Wizards, Tamler Sommers and David Pizarro. They discuss what psychology, philosophy, and art can and can't do. Does psychology get more respect than it deserves? How has philosophy contributed to supporting the COVID-19 pandemic response? In principle, is it possible to measure authoritarianism or love or neuroticism? How has VBW not become an icon of the IDW?
\n\nBonus: Who loves Tamler's step-mother the most?
Special Guest: Very Bad Wizards.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome humanistic psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman to the show. Scott talks about his academic path from intelligence researcher to positive psychologist. What is humanistic psychology? Can one study humananistic concepts like self-actualization, flourishing, and meaning scientifically? What does evolutionary psychology get wrong about basic human needs?
\n\nBonus: SBK sings!
Special Guest: Scott Barry Kaufman.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey spend the first half of the episode discussing how thier lives have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. How has the pademic affected those with and without children? How has the pandemic impacted our various relationships? For the second half of the episode, they discuss what to make of the rush of psychology research on COVID-19. Given psychology's noted problems with replication, generalizability, and standards of evidence, should psychologists be trying to shape public policy? What actionable advice can psychology offer?
\n\nBonus: Mickey finally says what he truly think of the Very Bad Wizards crew.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Nina Strohminger, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics at the Wharton School of Business, to the show. Nina delivers entertaining takes on digust and morality, the true self, adventures in academia, and writing heroic book reviews. Do incidental emotions reliably impact decision making? What aspect of mind is at the core of one's identity? Which neurodegenerative diseases are the most difficult for caregivers to cope with? What does Nina really think about Colin McGinn's book, The Meaning of Disgust?
\n\nBonus: What is worse: pop-psychology or pop-philosophy?
Special Guest: Nina Strohminger.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome evolutionary psychologist Joshua Tybur to the podcast to discuss COVID-19 and the function of disgust as part of the behavioral immune system. What is the relationship between disgust sensitivity and political orientation? Can the theory of evolutionary act as a meta-theory for the study of human psychology? Why is evolutionary psychology so controversial and polarizing?
\n\nBonus: Would Mickey inflate a new unlubricated condom with his mouth?
Special Guest: Joshua Tybur.
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome return guest Elizabeth Page-Gould to the podcast to discuss adults with and without children. Why did Liz choose to have children? What do we make of fathers who leave their familiies? How does society view people without children? What is the logic behind anti-natalism?
\n\nBonus: What is concept creep and is it necessarily a bad thing?
Special Guest: Elizabeth Page-Gould.
Sponsored By:
Links:
As Little Urban Achievers, Yoel and Mickey delight in discussing previews for The Jesus Rolls, a Big Lebowski spinoff starring John Torturo as Jesus Quintana. They next talk about the University of California's policy of selecting faculty job candidates based primarily on their diversity and inclusion statements. They finally talk science: What happens when open science advocates veer from their pre-registration plans and fail to reject the null hypothesis? Should we care about effect sizes in psychology outside of applied research?
Sponsored By:
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Stanford sociologist and psychologist Robb Willer to the show, who serves up hot takes about the replication crisis. Did the low replicabilty era in social psychology have consequences for political science or sociology? Has the open science movement benefited from motivated morality, only effecting change when change was easy? Despite intentions, will the open science movement make science even more elitist?
\n\nBonus: Taking psychedelic drugs at music concerts is fun!
Special Guest: Robb Willer.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss a new paper by Tal Yarkoni suggesting that quantitative research in psychology is suffering from a generaliozability crisis. Do the numbers and statistics that psychological scientists present in their papers correspond to their verbal claims? What would psychological science look like if psychologists made fewer general statements? Should psychologists conduct more qualitative and descriptive research? Did Tal Yarkoni himself use a quantitative argument to prop up very old verbal claims about the problem of induction?
\n\nBonus: Before discussing generalizability, Yoel and Mickey discuss Contrapoints and her new video on cancel-culture.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey declare war on Christmas, discuss US-Canada differences, and almost entirely avoid serious topics.
\n\nBonus semi-serious topic: are all theories in psychology bound to be true?
Links:
Mickey and Yoel chat with Nick Hobson, a psychologist who has moved from academia to applying behavioral science in the real world. What are some of the challenges that face academics-turned-practitioners? How can you apply psychological research in a rigorous way while, at the same time, keeping the bosses happy? We talk to Nick to find out.
\n\nPlus: Yoel's eventful evening, and microdosing.
Special Guest: Nick Hobson.
Links:
Are many classic social psychology experiments more theater than science? Mickey and Yoel discuss "The Rise and Fall of Social Psychology," a book by the sociologist Augustine Brannigan that makes this provocative claim. Given the complexity of social life, are laboratory experiments just the wrong way to measure most social phenomena?
\n\nBonus: who is Don Cherry, and what is his beef with Yoel?
Links:
Mickey and Yoel take advantage of the SESP (Society for Experimental Social Psychology) conference to ask guests some hard-hitting questions about the present and future of social psychology (and, of course, beers). We then answer the same questions ourselves.
\n\nBonus: why are we banning applause on the show?
Special Guests: Hanah Chapman, Keith Maddox, Laura Niemi, and Pam Smith.
Links:
Mickey and Yoel talk with Debra Mashek, the executive director of Heterodox Academy, an organization working to increase open inquiry, viewpoint diversity and constructive disagreement in academia. But what does that mean exactly? Aren't these just codewords for "more conservatives"? We talk to Debra to find out.
\n\nWe also ask Debra about her decision to leave her tenured faculty position and move across the country to take this job.
Special Guest: Debra Mashek.
Links:
Jessica Flake joins Mickey and Yoel to talk measurement. What is it, how do you do it well, and do social psychologists care about it? What does measurement theory tell us about the validity of standardized tests like the GRE? Jessica also talks about how she went from high-school dropout to professor at McGill.
\n\nBonus: what the hell is Kentucky Gentleman?
Special Guest: Jessica Flake.
Links:
By listener request, Yoel quizzes Mickey about ego depletion. How did we start studying it? How has the replication crisis changed how we think about it? After more than a decade studying ego depletion, does Mickey still have any faith in the phenomenon?
\n\nBonus: what does it mean to say, "don't @ me"?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss the role of eminence in science. Is there a role for eminence in psychology? What makes a researcher eminent? Would we be better off disregarding eminence entirely?
\n\nYour hosts also discuss common myths in psychology plus a recent mini-controversy in which someone compared New York Times columnist Brett Stephens to a bedbug.
\n\nPlus: what did Yoel bring back from Hawaii?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss sacred values. How are sacred valued different from other values? What are the hallmarks of values that have become sacrilized? Why does it seem crass, or even offensive, to suggest trading off a sacred value (such as diversity value) against other, more mundane considerations? What does it mean that sacred values are dose insensitive and evidence insensitive?
\n\nBonus: Do scientists who attended conferences sponsored by the late Jeffrey Epstein need to morally cleanse?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Associate Professor of Psychology, Alexa Tullett from the University of Alabama to the podcast. Co-host of The Black Goat podcast and board member of the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS), Alexa talks about being a Canadian early career researcher working in the US. What research is Alexa most excited about these days? How did she become interested in meta science? What advice would she give to non-Americans thinking of working in academia in the US? How did the Black Goat podcast come about?
\n\nBonus: Follow-up on the effect of parenting on happiness.
Special Guest: Alexa Tullett.
Links:
Playing devil's advocate, Yoel and Mickey mount a criticism against the scientific study of mindfulness. What is mindfulness? Can we measure it? Is mindfulness-based therapy effective? Can mindfulness improve the quality of attention beyond the meditation cushion? Are effects of mindfulness mostly placebo effects produced by motivated practitioners and adherents? Should we be impressed by mindfulness meditation’s supposed effects on conceptions of the self? Is mindfulness, in all its complexity, amenable to scientific study?
\n\nBonus: Is the value of diversity and inclusivity a core part of open science?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Paul Bloom to the podcast, who is not only a returning guest but also the Brooks and Suzanne Ragen Professor of Psychology at Yale University. We first give terrible advice on parenting. Does parenting affect happiness, relationship satisfaction, and meaning? Does parenting screw with prospective decision making because it leaves the decision maker utterly transformed? We next discuss perversity. Why do we enjoy doing transgressive things? Who is likely to be perverted? Is perversion ever a good strategy?
\n\nBonus: How would Paul rate Yoel on a scale of 1 to 5?
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Professor of Psychology and Politics John Jost from New York University to the podcast. Author of the most influential political psychology paper of the last two decades, John talks about the role of psychology in politics and the role of politics in psychology. Is it fair to characterize conservatives as dogmatic, rigid, and close-minded? Given replication failures, are conservatives indeed more attuned to negative stimuli in their environments? Does the description of conservatives as resistant to change applicable in the Trump era? Should social scientists be advocates/activists, neutral fact-finders, or something in between? Why is the dominance of liberals in social psychology (and academia more broadly) not a problem?
\n\nBonus: What is with all the homo-eroticism?
Special Guest: John Jost.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey take a deep dive into the Democratic Primary field, asking what the field of judgment and decision making can teach us about the large and diverse field of Democratic candidates. Why is Biden leading in the polls? Is Elizabeth Warren being helped by Kamala Harris? Why isn’t Biden hurt by progressives’ deep dislike of him? What should we make of one-issue voters?
\n\nBonus: Yoel makes a fearless and consequential prediction. Who will make him stick to his word?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Slate columnist Daniel Engber to the podcast. Dan talks about the state of science journalism, including what he sees as more skeptical, less credulous reporting. He also talks about the replication crisis in psychology, imposter syndrome in academics, concussion in sport, and the value of blue-ribbon panels opining on the state of science. Dan also delights with his contrarian takes on marathon running, the windchill factor, and a computer’s progress bar.
\n\nBonus: Yoel yet again finds an excuse to drink no beer at all.
Special Guest: Daniel Engber.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Professor of Psychology Brent Roberts from the University of Illinois to the podcast. One of the most influential personality psychologists of our day, Brent unleashes his thoughts on broad range of topics: candidate gene studies, personality, conscientiousness, coddling of the American mind, screen-time, senior colleagues, and the replication crisis in psychology. What is personality and how does it change? Why do people love the Myers-Briggs personality test? How would conscientiousness have helped us in our ancestral past? Has helicopter-parenting made American kids fragile and easily debilitated? Has the smartphone actually destroyed a generation? Should we be optimistic about the gains made by the reform movement in psychology?
\n\nBonus: Mickey gives Yoel a surprise gift.
Special Guest: Brent Roberts.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss the concept of privilege, the unearned, sometimes invisible conditions of a person’s life that give them advantages that others might not have. What are the benefits of acknowledging one’s privilege and calling it out in others? Are there drawbacks to focusing on the immutable characteristics of a person that might normally proffer advantages? If all our characteristics are unearned, that is products of biology and environment that we have zero control over, should people be praised or blamed for them? But, first, they discuss new internal analyses by Google suggesting it has been overpaying women, not men; they then raise serious concerns about this analysis because it conditioned on a collider, a statistical concept that Yoel and Mickey (to put it generously) struggle to understand.
\n\nBonus: Mickey falls in love with bidets.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey talk with Sarah Haider, the co-founder and Executive Director of Ex-Muslims of North America, an organization that advocates for the acceptance of religious dissent and supports those who leave Islam. Sarah talks about her own experience of growing up Muslim and leaving her faith; the unique predicament of and risks for Muslim dissenters; and how US partisan politics make her work more difficult.
\n\nBonus: Sarah gives Mickey pointers on how to avoid using Twitter as an outrage machine, a lesson he sorely needs.
Special Guest: Sarah Haider.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss Kill All Normies, a book written by Angela Nagle about the online culture wars, the rise of transgressive politics, and the disappearance of moderates. But, first they discuss a new journal article titled The Paradox of Viral Outrage suggesting that online pile-ons tend to backfire
\n\nBonus: What does Mickey really think about Christina Hoff Sommers?
Links:
We are going to be on a one-episode-a-month schedule till May. Why? Because Mickey is on sabbatical from his cough incredibly demanding job: ✈️🌴🏖🍹😎
Links:
","summary":"We are going to be on a one-episode-a-month schedule till May.","date_published":"2019-02-06T05:00:00.000-05:00","attachments":[{"url":"https://chtbl.com/track/5195D/aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/69da8ae3-a19e-41ed-a678-0e145a936a3f/8f9f17f7-16e5-4b54-a51e-54b1267f1f75.mp3","mime_type":"audio/mp3","size_in_bytes":3626212,"duration_in_seconds":226}]},{"id":"d9dad8cd-92f1-4c49-9916-897bdbad935b","title":"Episode 18: What Science and the Humanities Offer Each Other (with Edward Slingerland)","url":"https://www.fourbeers.com/18","content_text":"Yoel and Mickey welcome Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies, Edward (Ted) Slingerland from the University of British Columbia to the podcast. Ted discusses what the sciences can offer the humanities, but also how the humanities can enrich science. Ted then discusses his popular book, \"Trying Not To Try\", where he describes the Chinese concept of Wu-Wei, which can be defined as effortless action or spontaneity and proposes that the ever-striving West could use a lot more of it. Finally, Ted tries in vain to convince Mickey that intoxication is an important, critical part of culture.\n\nBonus: Did Ted actually say there are downsides to being Dude-like?Special Guest: Edward (Ted) Slingerland.Links:Cantillon BreweryBrasserie TimmermansMort SubiteWhat Science Offers the Humanities | Edward Slingerland — This book examines some of the deep problems facing current approaches to the study of culture, focusing especially on the excesses of postmodernism, but also acknowledging the problems with Enlightenment objectivism. Slingerland argues that, for the humanities to progress, they need to move beyond the mind-body dualism upon which both postmodernism and objectivism are based.Trying Not to Try: The Art and Science of Spontaneity (9780770437619): Edward Slingerland: Books — A deeply original exploration of the power of spontaneity—an ancient Chinese ideal that cognitive scientists are only now beginning to understand—and why it is so essential to our well-beingTwo Psychologists Four Beers - Blog - A Note From Ted Slingerland","content_html":"Yoel and Mickey welcome Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies, Edward (Ted) Slingerland from the University of British Columbia to the podcast. Ted discusses what the sciences can offer the humanities, but also how the humanities can enrich science. Ted then discusses his popular book, "Trying Not To Try", where he describes the Chinese concept of Wu-Wei, which can be defined as effortless action or spontaneity and proposes that the ever-striving West could use a lot more of it. Finally, Ted tries in vain to convince Mickey that intoxication is an important, critical part of culture.
\n\nBonus: Did Ted actually say there are downsides to being Dude-like?
Special Guest: Edward (Ted) Slingerland.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss Identity Crisis, a new book about the 2016 US presidential election written by the political scientists John Sides, Michael Tesler, and Lynn Vavreck. But first, they talk about the recent controversy over Patreon's ban of a provocative internet personality and what, if any, implications this has for free speech.
\n\nBonus: who is Mickey's favorite Sex and the City character?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey sit down with Anne Wilson of Wilfrid Laurier University to discuss free speech, the Lindsay Shepherd case, political polarization, #MeToo, and more.
\n\nBonus: how many tattoos does Mickey have, and is that why he's less trustworthy?
Special Guest: Anne Wilson.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss two mini-controversies recently in the news: 1) Should equity, diversity, and inclusion statements be required from academic job candidates? Do they signal the liberal values of academia, and if so, is that a bad thing? 2) Are psychologists disproportionately likely to argue that free speech is in crisis on campus? If so, why?
\n\nBonus: Mickey describes an intimate product that he definitely does not own.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey have their first repeat guest as Liz Page-Gould joins them to talk vices. Weed, booze and porn are all on the table (well, not literally) as we take on some popular vices. Why do you get paranoid when you smoke? Was alcohol really the impetus for agriculture? Is watching porn bad for your relationship? Bonus: learn who's watched porn in the last week.
Special Guest: Elizabeth Page-Gould.
Links:
Journalist Jesse Singal joins Yoel and Mickey to talk about the state of science journalism, what he thinks is wrong with how people interpret the Implicit Association Test (IAT), and the pros and cons of moral outrage. Why do so many science journalists simply repeat talking points from university press releases? Is it ethical to administer the IAT as a teaching tool? What is social media like for a journalist?
\n\nBonus: Yoel, Mickey, & Jesse discuss a new paper arguing there are upsides to moral outrage.
Special Guest: Jesse Singal.
Links:
Mickey and Yoel take on social media. What are the upsides and downsides of being on social media, particularly Twitter? Why does Mickey ban himself from social media for most of the day? What led Yoel to abandon Twitter entirely for two weeks, and what drew him back in? Would the open science movement have happened without social media? Bonus: when is it a good idea to give voice to the voiceless?
Links:
Yoel and Mickey discuss how scientists should publicize their work. Should scientists issue press releases about their findings? Should they write op-ed columns to communicate directly with the public? If Yoel writes an op-ed about Mickey's paper, is that weird? Do scientists have an obligation to share their work with the public, or does self-promotion involve too many perverse incentives?
\n\nBonus: Toronto sex doll brothel, raw water, and beaver fever.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Clay Routledge to the show. Clay is a professor of psychology at North Dakota State University who studies the cognitive and motivational consequences of the search for meaning, including religion and other supernatural beliefs. Clay talks about his childhood growing up as the child of missionaries in Africa and the U.S., what it's like to be outside the liberal mainstream in psychology, and how religion and belief in alien visitors may be connected.
Special Guest: Clay Routledge.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome author, journalist, historian, and bioethicist Alice Dreger to the show. Alice, who wrote Galileo’s Middle Finger, discusses how her upbringing, her academic background, and her own Galilean personality led her to piss so many people off in the service of serving both truth and justice. Can academics pursue both truth and justice? What is a Galilean personality? Do activists pollute science? Why did Alice refuse to be lumped in with the so-called Intellectual Dark Web? How can we improve the way newspapers work?
\n\nBonus: Why did Yoel and Mickey create an (Alice approved) drinking podcast?
Special Guest: Alice Dreger.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey welcome Northeastern University research scientist and science critic James Heathers to their show. Yoel, Mickey, and James discuss science reform and the need for robust science criticism. Why is it so hard for some (older) scientists to admit their mistakes? Do science critics feel empathy for the scholars they criticize? Is there a danger of science criticism going too far, even over-correcting? What exactly is Yoel drinking this episode?
\n\nBonus: James discusses his fascinating research on people who can control their goosebumps.
\n\nBonus Bonus: Yoel and Mickey submit to James's break-music request.
Special Guest: James Heathers.
Links:
Yoel and Mickey ask how to know when the political Left has gone too far. Assuming the Left can indeed go too far--turning off even other progressives who feel abandoned by their natural political home--Yoel and Mickey riff on ways this might manifest. The conversation includes a discussion of identity politics, the problems with subjectivity, the challenge of balancing the desire for justice with the desire for truth, and the inherent problem of being both a scientist and activist. Before debating the supposed sins of the Left, Yoel and Mickey discuss a new paper overturning the cause of the so-called negativity bias (i.e., the notion that bad is stronger than good).
\n\nBonus: Mickey makes a risky hypothesis about German beers. Can any listeners provide evidence that disconfirms Mickey’s bold claim?
Links:
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.
\n\nBonus: 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:
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?
\n\nBonus: Yoel, Mickey, and Paul each completed a validated measure of agreeableness. Can you guess who came out on “top”?
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
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?
\n\nBonus: Did Mickey spike Toxoplasma gondii (crazy cat lady parasite) in Yoel’s beer?
Links:
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?
\n\nBonus: Why did Yoel decide to have us drink the champagne of beers?
Links:
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:
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.
\n\nAlso: who are we and why are we doing this?
Links: