August 8, 2022
How is outcome bias especially relevant to science publishing? What are some possible solutions for overcoming outcome bias? In what ways are the publishing and peer review processes flawed? Why do many (or maybe most) scientists perform peer reviews for free? What value do publishers add to the scientific process, especially given that the internet democratizes distribution? How do (and should) scientific journals differ from newspapers? What kinds of changes must academic systems implement in order to improve in parallel with the proposed improvements for journals? How likely is it that a random preregistered study will replicate? Why can't we come to a consensus about some fraught topics like ego depletion?
Chris Chambers is a professor of cognitive neuroscience at Cardiff University. His primary research focuses on the psychology and neurobiology of executive functions and higher cognition. He is also interested in the relationship between science and the media, ways the academic community can better contribute to evidence-based public policy, and methods for improving the reliability and transparency of science. You can reach Chris via email at chambersc1@cardiff.ac.uk, follow him on Twitter at @chrisdc77, or learn more at his website.
Click here to return to the list of all episodes.
Sign up to receive one helpful idea and one brand-new podcast episode each week!
Subscribe via RSS or through one of the major podcast platforms:
Apple Podcasts
Spotify
Stitcher
Google Podcasts
TuneIn
Amazon
RSS
Host / Director
Spencer Greenberg
Producer
Josh Castle
Audio Engineer
Ryan Kessler
Factotum
Uri Bram
Transcriptionists
WeAmplify
Music
Lee Rosevere
Josh Woodward
Broke for Free
zapsplat.com
wowamusic
Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
Affiliates
Please note that
Clearer Thinking
,
Mind Ease
, and
UpLift
are all affiliated with this podcast.