This week on the program, we’re going to solve a puzzle. Or, we’re going to try, at least. And here’s the challenge: how do you communicate the depth and gravity and overwhelming scientific consensus on the changes that are coming for our world without making people throw their hands up in despair?
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Utah Public Radio, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
It’s week 2 of Amy’s “Psychology as a Robust Science” course and we are discussing replications. What are they? Is there a distinction between direct and conceptual replications? Do direct replications actually exist? Tune in to (maybe) find out!
Related papers and links
Open Science Collaboration (2015) Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Nosek and Errington (2017) Making sense of replications
Brian Nosek’s Queensland talk Amy mentioned (roughly between 5:00-15:00): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsRmyW8GmJs
Gilbert, Daniel T., Gary King, Stephen Pettigrew, and Timothy D. Wilson. ‘Comment on “Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science”’. Science 351, no. 6277 (4 March 2016): 1037–1037. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad7243.
Anderson, Christopher J., Štěpán Bahník, Michael Barnett-Cowan, Frank A. Bosco, Jesse Chandler, Christopher R. Chartier, Felix Cheung, et al. ‘Response to Comment on “Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science”’. Science 351, no. 6277 (4 March 2016): 1037–1037. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad9163.
Bishop, Dorothy V. M. ‘BishopBlog: Sowing Seeds of Doubt: How Gilbert et al’s Critique of the Reproducibility Project Has Played out’. BishopBlog (blog), 27 May 2018. http://deevybee.blogspot.com/2018/05/sowing-seeds-of-doubt-how-gilbert-et.html
Music credit: Kevin MacLeod – Funkeriffic
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 present two stories from people who didn’t ask for help until it was too late.
Part 1: Determined to fit in as a PhD student, Aparna Agarwal decides she’ll never ask for help — even if it means fitting in to much smaller gloves.
Part 2: On a snorkeling trip of his dreams, Jesse Hildebrand doesn’t want to admit he has no idea what he’s doing.
Aparna Agarwal is a graduate student in Dr. Deepa Agashe’s lab at the National Centre for Biological Sciences, Bangalore, India, by day, and a random thoughts compiler whenever inspiration strikes her. Currently, she is trying to understand adaptation and the role of microbes in that process using the red flour beetle. She is, on an average day, clueless but curious and trying to find answers. In that quest, she loves to travel in person, as well as through the magic of books, articles, blogs, conversations and in general, stories. She enjoys using these stories to help her share and build her science.
Jesse Hildebrand is the VP of Education for Exploring By The Seat of Your Pants, a digital education non-profit that connects scientists and explorers with kids (http://www.exploringbytheseat.com/). He’s also the founder of Canada’s Science Literacy Week (http://www.scienceliteracy.ca/) and a fellow of the Royal Canadian Geographical Society (http://www.rcgs.org/). Jesse suffers from an excess of personality, watches too many Blue Jays games for his own good, and can enter into a spirited debate on the merits of the Marvel films.
You’ve gotten this far, which means you have probably read the episode title by now. And that means you have questions. So… many… questions….
Let’s answer a few of them right up front.
First, if you want to enter graduate school at age seventeen, you should probably start college around age eleven. That’s what this week’s guest Dr. Julia Nepper did.
Second, you should know that even though Julia’s educational biography is unusual, the lessons she learned along the way will feel familiar to every graduate student.
The Same New Story
As a child, Julia Nepper loved to read. “I would read for eight or ten hours a day, every single day,” she recalls.
Her parents decided to homeschool, which afforded her the flexibility to learn at her own pace. Her voracious appetite for books, and an intrinsic love of learning, propelled her through entire grade levels every few months.
By age eleven, she had scored highly on the SAT, and enrolled in a community college near home.
“You had to be at least sixteen to live in the dorms on campus,” she notes. “For the first two years, the college required me to have a guardian with me at all times, so my dad had to sit in the hallway outside of all of my classes.”
Julia completed her undergraduate degree in Biology. She was fifteen when she first applied to graduate school.
“I think I encountered my first big failure when I started applying to grad school, because I got rejected.”
Her age and limited research experience probably impacted the admissions decision, but that was not the end of her story. Julia learned about a post-baccalaureate research program that would give her time and training in a lab environment.
“I was going to get a year of ‘pre-grad-school’ where I would get to do research in the lab and act like a grad student, live like a grad student, bulk up my resume, learn more about whether or not I even wanted to do this… It was very exciting,” Julia explains.
After a year of post-bac training, Julia was accepted to the University of Wisconsin in Madison. She was elated, and eagerly moved to a new city to start her next adventure.
But it wasn’t long until she faced an uncomfortable reality familiar to many graduate students. Though Julia had a long history of success – of good grades and academic accolades – graduate school demanded something different from the studying and testing that measured her progress in high school or college.
“What made graduate school different was just the sheer amount of failure you encounter. And a lot of times, the complete lack of direction. Failing every single day starts to wear on you after awhile,” she remembers.
Dr. Julia Nepper (Photo By: Michelle Stocker)
In this episode, we ask Julia more about her unique experience as a teenager in graduate school. She tells us how she coped with failed experim…
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Joshua Hall and Daniel Arneman, PhDz, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
We find ourselves in pandemic times. The global population is under siege by an infectious virus new to humankind. It’s called Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, or SARS-CoV-2. It’s the causative agent of the pandemic disease designated COVID-19. This viral adversary knows no politics. It recognizes no national boundaries. It is unconcerned with anyone’s identity. All 7.8 billion of us are the same to the virus: we are all hosts suitable to commandeer to make copies of itself. DARPA has long recognized how devastating pandemic diseases like COVID-19 could be and the Agency embraced the attitude that it could do something about the threat of pandemics. In recent years, it has been creating and supporting communities of innovators who are doing the science and applying the lessons they are learning to create a technology platform that stands a chance of this: preventing any outbreak of infectious disease—anywhere and anytime—from growing into a global conflagration like the one we are experiencing right now. In this episode of the Voices from DARPA podcast, join a team of program managers in the Agency’s Biological Technologies Office as they explain how they are striving to develop a multi-pronged technology platform that has the potential to render COVID-19 humanity’s last pandemic.
The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from DARPA, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
Benjamin Thompson, Noah Baker, and Amy Maxmen discuss the labs struggling to get involved in diagnostic testing, and should you be wearing a mask?
In this episode:
02:07 A drive to diagnose
Many research labs are pivoting from their normal work to offer diagnostic testing for COVID-19. We discuss how to go about retooling a lab, the hurdles researchers are facing and why, in some cases, tests are not being taken up.
Around the world, research groups are rushing to create a vaccine against the coronavirus. We hear about one group’s effort, and how vaccine development is being sped up, without sacrificing safety steps.