Domains featuring this topic
Explore the domains where this topic appears.
Recent views on pre-registration
A discussion on some recent perspectives on pre-registration, which has become a growing trend in the past few years. This is not just limited to neuroimaging, and it applies to most scientific fields. We will start with this overview editorial by Simmons et al. (2021): https://faculty.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/34-Simmons-Nelson-Simonsohn-2021a.pdf, and also talk about a more critical perspective by Pham & Oh (2021): https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michel-Pham/publication/349545600_Preregistration_Is_Neither_Sufficient_nor_Necessary_for_Good_Science/links/60fb311e2bf3553b29096aa7/Preregistration-Is-Neither-Sufficient-nor-Necessary-for-Good-Science.pdf. I would like us to discuss the pros and cons of pre-registration, and if we have time, I may do a demonstration of how to perform a pre-registration through the Open Science Framework.
What's wrong with the prosopagnosia literature? A new approach to diagnosing and researching the condition
Developmental prosopagnosia is characterised by severe, lifelong difficulties when recognising facial identity. Most researchers require prosopagnosia cases exhibit ultra-conservative levels of impairment on the Cambridge Face Memory Test before they include them in their experiments. This results in the majority of people who believe that they have this condition being excluded from the scientific literature. In this talk I outline the many issues that will afflict prosopagnosia research if this continues, and show that these excluded cases do exhibit impairments on all commonly used diagnostic tests when a group-based method of assessment is utilised. I propose a paradigm shift away from cognitive task-based approaches to diagnosing prosopagnosia, and outline a new way that researchers can investigate this condition.
The recent history of the replication crisis in psychology & how Open Science can be part of the solution
In recent years, more and more evidence has accumulated showing that many studies in psychological research cannot be replicated, effects are often overestimated, and little is publicly known about unsuccessful studies. What are the mechanisms behind this crisis? In this talk, I will explain how we got there and why it is still difficult to break free from the current system. I will further explain which role Open Science plays within the replication crisis and how it can help to improve science. This might sound like a pessimistic, negative talk, but I will end it on a positive note, I promise!
Neurosexism and the brain: how gender stereotypes can distort or even damage research
The ‘Hunt the Sex Difference’ agenda has informed brain research for decades, if not centuries. This talk aims to demonstrate how a fixed belief in differences between ‘male’ and ‘female’ brains can narrow and even distort the research process. This can include the questions that are asked, the methodology selected and the analytical pipeline. It can also powerfully inform the interpretation of results and the ‘spin’ used in the public communication of such research.