This week we discuss Professor Dorothy Bishop’s “Responding to fallibility in science” https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2515245918776632
Its been a while since we discussed a paper on the podcast. We really got into this discussion, and only got as far as “How should we deal with our own errors?”. A whole two pages into the paper. We will revisit this paper soon to discuss responding to other’s errors and distinguishing between the research and the researcher.
How do you think we should respond to our own errors? let us know!
Music credit:
Kevin MacLeod – Funkerific
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from ReproducibiliTea Podcast, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
Hello 2019! Amy, Sophia, and Sam discuss impostor syndrome. While Sam was concerned this would leave him wanting to hide under the desk and cry-eat chocolate for the rest of the day, it turned into an unexpectedly uplifting talk.
Get in touch with your experiences; what helps? what makes it worse? how can we help each other?
Just a few links:
We should all feel a bit more like impostors – Julia Rohrer – https://www.the100.ci/2018/08/02/we-should-all-feel-a-bit-more-like-impostors/
Sam’s old, early blog post on what impostor syndrome feels like https://samdparsons.blogspot.com/2017/10/students-questions-4-what-is-imposter.html
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from ReproducibiliTea Podcast, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
This week we talked about “Open Science: What, Why, and How” from Spellman, Gilbert, and Corker. You can find the paper on OSF https://osf.io/gv6r4/
0:14 Sophia is leaving Oxford 🙁 (But the Podcast will continue)
0:48 This week’s focus: Open Science What Why and How; few in the JC read it but the discussion was awesome https://osf.io/gv6r4/
2:15 Shoutout to Matt Jaquiery @MJaquiery
2:40 Broad Meaning of Open Science — what do we mean; potentially misleading to include things beyond Open?
5:10 The Centre for Science that’s Actually Science
6:05 Focussing on Open Data as “open signalling”
7:30 What even is Open Data? Criteria for Open Data; How it can go wrong
10:25 Open vs Usable Data
11:10 FAIR Guidelines — Findable Accessible Open Source Interoperable Reusable
12:20 (Advantages of) Open Code
15:30 Why is Open Science just Science Done Right?
16:00 Answer Sam: Open Code — Show Your Working
17:00 Answer Amy: Work cumulatively in order to avoid waste of taxpayers’ money
18:20 Answer Sophia: being open about subjectivities; slightly tautological argument of Open Science just is Science
21:10 Better system for citing code!
23:20 Not sharing data? Is it selfish?
27:30 BREAK
29:00 Shoutout to Remi Gau; Amy will be singing for you
29:40 Amy and Sophia compete for supremacy in the Table 2 challenge – what are the problems and solutions at each stage of the research process?
31:10 Challenging Two Psychologists Four Beers to the Crossover Event 5 Psychologists 50 Shots
32:00 Competition Begins: 1. Research Planning
34:35 AMY IS THE QUEEN
35:00 Competition part 2. Data Collection and Methods Reporting
36:30 Sam has a picture of James Heathers next to his bed (aka. Amy and Sophia try to make Sam look like a creep)
37:45 Competition part 3. Data Analysis and Reporting
38:54 https://jasp-stats.org
39:25 Competition part 4. Publication Process
41:30 Open Peer Review — Do you have any good or bad experiences of this?
42:40 Competition part 5. Storing and Archiving
44:10 Why do we give publishers the chance to adapt to openness, when we should just get rid of them?
49:55 Amy wins 14-10, but is also the kindest The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from ReproducibiliTea Podcast, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
