In this episode, James sits in the guest chair as Dan interviews him on his recent work find and exposing inconsistent results in the scientific literature.
Stuff they cover:
How James got into finding and exposing inconsistent results
The critiques of James’ critiques
How James would do things differently, if he were start over again?
Separating nefarious motives from sloppiness
The indirect victims of sloppy science
Grants that fund sloppy science take resources from responsible science projects
If people actually posted their data and methods, James’ job would be much easier
Registered reports improve the quality of science
If James could show one slide to every introductory psychology lecture what would it say?
The one thing James believes that others think is crazy
What James has changed his mind about in the last year
Links
The Sokal hoax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
James’ Psychological Science paper: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797615572908
The @IamSciComm Tweetstorm on podcasting: https://twitter.com/iamscicomm/status/935851867661357057