Nullius in Verba

Prologus 66: The Psychology of Controversy (E. G. Boring)

Boring, E. G. (1929). The psychology of controversy. Psychological Review, 36(2), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072273

Episode 65: Scientia de Scientia - II

In the second episode on metascience, we discuss the benefits of metascientific study according to Mario Bunge, some key milestones in sociology, psychology, and anthropology of science, and whether there should be a science of the science of science.
 
Shownotes
Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. McMillian & Co. https://archive.org/details/englishmenofscie00galtuoft
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Sage Publications. 
Candolle, A. de (with Fisher - University of Toronto). (1873). Histoire des sciences et des savants depuis deux siècles; suivie d’autres études sur des sujets scientifiques, en particulier sur la sélection dans l’espèce humaine. Genève, Georg. http://archive.org/details/histoiredesscie00cand
Vaesen, K. (2021). French Neopositivism and the Logic, Psychology, and Sociology of Scientific Discovery. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 11(1), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1086/712934
 

Episode 64: Scientia de Scientia - I

In the first part of this two-part episode, we explore the foundations of metascience—what it is, how it relates to and differs from the history and philosophy of science, and why understanding its philosophical roots matters. We also discuss the “four pillars” of the field and whether formal experience is necessary to contribute meaningfully to metascientific work.
 
Shownotes
Gholson, B., Jr, W. R. S. J., Neimeyer, R. A., & Houts, A. C. (Eds.). (1989). Psychology of Science: Contributions to Metascience. Cambridge University Press.
Bunge, M. (1959). Why metascience? Metascientific Queries (pp. 3-27). Charles C Thomas.
 

Prologus 64: Why Metascience? (M. Bunge)

Bunge, M. (1959). Why metascience? Metascientific Queries (pp. 3-27). Charles C Thomas. 

Episode 63: Experimenta Praematura

In this episode we discuss whether psychology is engaging in premature experimentation. Are experiments overused, and should we make greater use of other approaches to knowledge generation? If so, which methods should we use instead? And what can we learn from the way Martians would fund research on soccer? Enjoy.
Rozin, P. (2001). Social psychology and science: Some lessons from Solomon Asch. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(1), 2–14.
Brower, D. (1949). The problem of quantification in psychological science. Psychological Review, 56(6), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061802
Danziger, K. (1985). The methodological imperative in psychology. Philosophy of the social sciences, 15(1), 1-13.
 

Episode 62: Experimenta Exploratoria

In this episode we discuss exploratory experimentation, an iterative process used by scientists to better understand phenomena. We ask why exploratory research seems to be valued less in science, the importance of lab notebooks, and what makes for a good exploratory study.
 
References:
Steinle, F. (2016). Exploratory experiments: Ampère, Faraday, and the origins of electrodynamics. University of Pittsburgh press.
Skinner, B. F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11(5), 221–233.
Popper, K. R. (1962). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge.
Ditroilo, M., Mesquida ,Cristian, Abt ,Grant, & and Lakens, D. (2025). Exploratory research in sport and exercise science: Perceptions, challenges, and recommendations. Journal of Sports Sciences, 43(12), 1108–1120. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2025.2486871
Paul Meehl's Philosophical Psychology Lectures: https://meehl.umn.edu/video
Höfler, M., Scherbaum, S., Kanske, P., McDonald, B., & Miller, R. (2022). Means to valuable exploration: I. The blending of confirmation and exploration and how to resolve it. Meta-Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2021.2837
 

Episode 61: Septem Vacae Sacrae III

This is the final installment of the three-part series on Paul Meehl's unpublished book, The Seven Sacred Cows of Academia.

Episode 60: Septem Vacae Sacrae II

This is the second part of a three-episode series on Paul Meehl's unpublished book, The Seven Sacred Cows of Academia.

Episode 59: Septem Vacae Sacrae I

This is the first part of a three-episode series on Paul Meehl's unpublished book, The Seven Sacred Cows of Academia. 

Episode 58: Communicatio Scientiae

In this episode, we discuss science communication. What is the purpose of science communication? Who does or should engage in it? Are there negative consequences of communicating science to the public? And what should we discuss over coffee and sandwiches?
 
Shownotes
Joubert, M. (2019). Beyond the Sagan effect. Nature Astronomy, 3(2), 131-132.
Martinez-Conde, S. (2016). Has contemporary academia outgrown the Carl Sagan effect?. Journal of Neuroscience, 36(7), 2077-2082.
Turner, J. (1962). Some Coffee and Sandwiches? Science, 136, 231-231. 
Bruine de Bruin, W., & Bostrom, A. (2013). Assessing what to address in science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(3), 14062-14068.
Burns, T. W., O'Connor, D. J., & Stocklmayer, S. M. (2003). Science communication: a contemporary definition. Public Understanding of Science, 12(2), 183-202.
Fischhoff, B. (2013). The sciences of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(3), 14033-14039.