Episode 79: Dissensio - II

About this episode

The episode discusses how to effectively engage in disagreement within the scientific community.

In this episode, we continue our discussion of disagreement in science, shifting the conversation from why it matters to how to do it well. Shownotes Paul Graham. (2008). How to disagree. Rapoport's Rules. Cass Sunstien. The Rapoport Rules. Preregistration is redundant, at best. An Evidence-Based Critique of the Cass Review Fiedler, K., Messner, C., & Bluemke, M. (2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 74–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280600681248 Neyman, J. (1961). Silver Jubilee of My Dispute With Fisher. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 3, 145–154.

People in this episode

Hosts: Smriti Mehta, Daniël Lakens

Topics covered

• disagreement in science
• how to disagree
• Rapoport's Rules
• evidence-based critique
• Implicit Association Test
• scientific discourse

Keywords

• disagreement
• science
• Rapoport's Rules
• evidence-based critique
• Implicit Association Test
• scientific discourse

Mentioned in this episode

Books & works: How to disagree, The Rapoport Rules, An Evidence-Based Critique of the Cass Review, Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT), European Review of Social Psychology, Silver Jubilee of My Dispute With Fisher, Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan