Search Episodes
Listen, Share, & Support
Listen to the latest episode
Subscribe via iTunes
Subscribe via RSS
Become a fan
Follow on Twitter

Support Us:

Please consider making a donation to help make this podcast possible. Any contribution, great or small, helps tremendously!

 
Subscribe to E-Mail Updates

Related Readings
  • Answers for Aristotle: How Science and Philosophy Can Lead Us to A More Meaningful Life
    Answers for Aristotle: How Science and Philosophy Can Lead Us to A More Meaningful Life
    by Massimo Pigliucci
  • Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk
    Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk
    by Massimo Pigliucci
  • Denying Evolution: Creationism, Scientism, and the Nature of Science
    Denying Evolution: Creationism, Scientism, and the Nature of Science
    by Massimo Pigliucci
Sunday
Mar182018

RS 204 - Simine Vazire on “Reforming psychology and self-awareness”

Release date: March 18th, 2018

Simine Vazire

Simine Vazire is a professor of psychology, the author of the blog, "Sometimes I'm Wrong," and a major advocate for improving the field of psychology. She and Julia discuss several potential objections to Simine's goal, how to handle criticism, and Simine's psychology research on the question: How self-aware are people about the way they behave?

Simine's Pick: "My Grandfather's Son: A Memoir" by Clarence Thomas (paired with: any biography of Clarence Thomas)

Simine's Blog: "Sometimes I'm Wrong"

Simine's Podcast: "The Black Goat"

Edited by Brent Silk

Music by Miracles of Modern Science

 

Full Transcripts 

Reader Comments (3)

I always enjoy listening to the rational minds you interview, and this particular podcast was excellent. Thanks.
March 20, 2018 | Unregistered CommenterPhil Stilwell
Julia has covered this topic in depth on several RSPC episodes now. It seems we need to have a place to publish negative results, so that researchers can get publication credit towards tenure, otherwise researchers will have a tremendous incentive to find a positive result even where it does not exist. Researchers should also publish their raw data, at the time of of publication in order to prevent plagiarism. If we only reward entirely novel theories and not incremental advancement, we will get a host of disciplines full of fanciful but poorly verified theories. Furthermore, perhaps obtaining tenure should actually require performing and publishing a certain number of replication studies.

Thanks for another excellent discussion.
March 21, 2018 | Unregistered CommenterJameson
The article you have shared here is very awesome. I really like and appreciate your work. The points you have mentioned in this article are useful. I must try to follow these points and also share others.
March 28, 2018 | Unregistered Commenteryify

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.