Two Psychologists Four Beers Yoel Inbar, Michael Inzlicht, and Alexa Tullett

In heated political debates, people are often accused of being hypocrites, lacking consistent foundational values. Today, Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent paper by David Pinsof, David Sears, and Martie Haselton, that challenges the commonsense notion that political belief systems stem from our core values. Instead, the authors propose that people form alliances with others, and develop political beliefs that serve to maintain those alliances. The cohosts discuss how these alliances might form, the various biases used to defend them, and whether values are truly absent from the process. They also tackle the deeper question of whether the alliance model means that neither side is right or wrong.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on UntappdPsyArXiv Preprints | Strange Bedfellows: The Alliance Theory of Political Belief SystemsR. Ring - "Hug" | Music Video - YouTube

Yoel and Alexa discuss a recent paper that takes a machine learning approach to estimating the replicability of psychology as a discipline. The researchers' investigation begins with a training process, in which an artificial intelligence model identifies ways that textual descriptions differ for studies that pass versus fail manual replication tests. This model is then applied to a set of 14,126 papers published in six well-known psychology journals over the past 20 years, picking up on the textual markers that it now recognizes as signals of replicable findings. In a mysterious twist, these markers remain hidden in the black box of the algorithm. However, the researchers hand-examine a few markers of their own, testing whether things like subfield, author expertise, and media interest are associated with the replicability of findings. And, as if machine learning models weren't juicy enough, Yoel trolls Alexa with an intro topic hand-selected to infuriate her.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on UntappdA discipline-wide investigation of the replicability of Psychology papers over the past two decades | PNASBest-Selling Author & Harvard Professor Steven Pinker Will Transform His Ideas into NFTs | BlocksterAre NFTs a Good Investment? | MoneyUnder30Miss Grit - Like You (Lyric Video) - YouTube

Alexa and Yoel chat with Paul Bloom about his newest book, Psych: The Story of the Human Mind. The book, built from Paul's popular Introduction to Psychology course, is an opinionated overview of the field of psychology but also a window into his deep fascination with the mind. Yoel and Alexa spend some time picking Paul's brain, inquiring about writing, and teaching, and how to avoid boredom. But Paul has a few questions of his own, challenging the cohosts to consider what their own version of Psych would look like. In the process, their conversation ranges from Freudian dream content, to the limitations of psychology, to the (glaring omission of) the anatomy of the inner ear.
Special Guest: Paul Bloom.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on UntappdPaul BloomPsych: The Story of the Human MindHow To Be Good | The New YorkerStrangers Drowning: Impossible Idealism, Drastic Choices, and the Urge to Help: MacFarquhar, Larissa: 9780143109785: Amazon.com: BooksFuture Home of the Living God: A Novel: Erdrich, Louise: 9780062694065: Amazon.com: Books

Andrew Devendorf joins Alexa and Yoel to discuss his work on "me-search" (or self-relevant research) within clinical psychology. He talks about the prevalence of mental health difficulties within the field, and the harmful taboos against speaking openly about them. And, he shares his own reasons for studying depression and suicide, and how he has been discouraged from citing personal experience as a motivation for his work. Their conversation also explores common misconceptions about mental illness, strengths of self-relevant research, and ways to be more supportive to those facing mental health challenges. In the end, Yoel and Alexa fail to resolve their debate about the existence of the "unbiased researcher."
Special Guest: Andrew Devendorf.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on UntappdAndrew Devendorf, M.A.PsyArXiv Preprints | Stigmatizing our own: Self-relevant research (Me-search) is common but frowned upon in clinical psychological sciencePsyArXiv Preprints | Is "me-search" a Kiss of Death in mental health researchOnly Human: Mental-Health Difficulties Among Clinical, Counseling, and School Psychology Faculty and TraineesMy Brother Went Missing, And The Search For Him Turned My World Upside Down | HuffPost HuffPost PersonalNADA SURF - where is my mind? (Official Video) - YouTube

Alexa and Yoel discuss the much trodden topic of implicit bias from a less trodden perspective: that of the general public. Offering insight into the public's views is a paper by Jeffrey Yen, Kevin Durrheim, and Romin Tafarodi, which explores public thinking about the implicit association test (IAT) through an examination of the New York Times comments section. These comments demonstrate varying reactions to the idea that negative associations with some identities - racial and otherwise - can bubble beneath the surface of our explicit attitudes. Some dismiss the IAT as "academic abstraction," while others see their scores as an opportunity for confession, or even absolution. Still others embrace the role of troll, a topic foreshadowed by our discussion of the proposed overhauling of New College of Florida.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on Untappd'I'm happy to own my implicit biases': Public encounters with the implicit association test - PubMedThe Bias of Individuals (in Crowds): Why Implicit Bias Is Probably a Noisily Measured Individual-Level Construct - Paul Connor, Ellen R. K. Evers, 2020Project ImplicitOpinion | DeSantis Allies Plot the Hostile Takeover of a Liberal College - The New York TimesPascal Comelade & Les Limiñanas - T.B. JerK +++ - YouTube

Yoel and special guest Rachel Hartman discuss the recent ouster of Klaus Fiedler, the former Editor in Chief of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science, over allegations of racism and abuse of power. They try to untangle a complicated story of peer review gone awry, explain the dueling open letters condemning and supporting Fiedler, and critically evaluate the allegations against him as well as the process that led to his dismissal as EIC. Along the way, they also talk about wine spritzers and journal prestige.
Special Guest: Rachel Hartman.
Links:
Two Psychologists Four Beers on UntappdMore of a Comment Than a QuestionDealing with Diversity in Psychology: Science and Ideology (Roberts, 2022)Dealing with diversity in psychology: Science or ideology? (Hommel, 2022)Diversity is Diverse: Social Justice Reparations and Science (Jussim, 2022)Letter to APS calling for Fiedler to be firedLetter to APS calling for due processAPS Statements in Response to Concerns About Editorial Practices at Perspectives on Psychological ScienceJoachim Krueger's Resignation LettersInterventions to reduce partisan animosity | Nature Human BehaviourYeah Yeah Yeahs - Burning (Official Video) - YouTube