Twitter post: https://twitter.com/wgervais/status/1251319948581892096?s=20

Baumeister paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S002210311600007X

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Do you have a file drawer? Cleaning out the file drawer is an idea that has been floating around on twitter, but is it feasible? What does it mean for past studies? Is there a way in which we could get a sense of how many studies are in file drawers? Also, we discuss writing letters of recommendation and how we evaluate the ones we read.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Are you on the academic job market? In this episode, we discuss our experiences being on the market, tips for success at a wide variety of universities, and our thoughts now that we've been on hiring committees. Most people won't be hired at an R1 university. Understanding what other types of universities are looking for can increase the likelihood of getting an academic job.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

We are required to judge people, whether it is students applying for graduate programs or faculty members going up for tenure. A number of graduate programs have dropped the GRE as a requirement for applications. Many of these programs cite potential biases in the GRE as a reason for removing the requirement. Proponents of the GRE state that, while possibly biased, the GRE is likely to be less biased than alternatives (e.g., letters of recommendation, personal statements). Another biased evaluation is student evaluations of teaching. Numerous studies have shown that they are affected by the teacher's gender and race, but can there still be value in the evaluations? In this episode we discuss whether these biased evaluations should still be used.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Links:

• A wave of graduate programs drops the GRE application requirement
• Brown eliminates GRE test requirement for 24 doctoral programs
• Should We Throw Out the GRE?
• Course Evaluations: Concerns with Gender and Racial Bias — Thanks to Dr. Conry-Murry (@cconrymurray) for sending this list to us.
• Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related
• Availability of cookies during an academic course session affects evaluation of teaching — The provision of chocolate cookies had a significant effect on course evaluation. These findings question the validity of SETs and their use in making widespread decisions within a faculty.
• A new intervention could help reduce bias against women college instructors in course evaluations.

Is it worth the time and effort to apply for grants when only a small percentage are funded? A recent paper by Kevin Gross and Carl Bergstrom (2019) suggests grant competitions in their corrent form are not worth it. We weigh in on our thoughts about the paper as well as grant funding, in general. We also briefly talk about the aspect of our jobs that motivate us to keep working. Spoiler alert: it is not applying for grants.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Links:

• Contest models highlight inherent inefficiencies of scientific funding competitions - Gross & Bergstrom, 2019 — "We find that the effort researchers waste in writing proposals may be comparable to the total scientific value of the research that the funding supports, especially when only a few proposals can be funded. Moreover, when professional pressures motivate investigators to seek funding for reasons that extend beyond the value of the proposed science (e.g., promotion, prestige), the entire program can actually hamper scientific progress when the number of awards is small."
• The inherent inefficiency of grant proposal competitions and the possible benefits of lotteries in allocating research funding

Is open science open to everyone? Are there potential costs to engaging in open science practices? Should diversity be a core value of open science? In this episode we attempt to tackle these potentially polarizing questions.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Links:

• Will This Time Be Different - Sanjay Srivastava
• Open Science Isn't Always Open to All Scientists

The call to use larger sample sizes in psychological research has been around for decades, but only relatively recently have researchers substantially increased the number of people in their studies. Although this change is certainly a good thing, it is quite possible that the emphasis on large sample sizes impacts certainly people (e.g., researchers with limited funding and access to no or small participant pools) and research areas (e.g., programs of research aimed at hard-to-recruit samples) more than others. In this episode, we discuss whether this is an issue for the field. We also talk about whether we've gone far enough to increase the sample sizes in our research.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Links:

• Research in Social Psychology Changed Between 2011 and 2016: Larger Sample Sizes, More Self-Report Measures, and More Online Studies
• Everything Hertz: 85: GWAS big teeth you have, grandmother (with Kevin Mitchell)
• StudySwap: A platform for interlab replication, collaboration, and research resource exchange
• Psychological Science Accelerator: A distributed laboratory network

Most academics go to conferences, but who are they good for? Are there disparities in who can attend and who benefits from conferences? In this episode, we talk about one potential factor contributing to disparities--differences in travel funding available at different universities. We also talk about our own experiences with what we've gotten out of conferences with respect to our research, teaching, and mentoring of students.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Collaborations are the norm, but can sometimes be a challenge. In this episode, we discuss issues we've had and ways we've dealt with collaborating with faculty members, students, and previous advisors.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

As professors, we often serve in many different roles: teacher, researcher, mentor, administrator, program director. With so many jobs, how do we define ourselves? With which role do we most identify? In this episode, we talk about our academic identities, how they have changed over time, and how our identities might shape other people's perceptions of us.

Marginally Significant is hosted by:
Andrew Smith @andrewrsmith
Twila Wingrove @twilawingrove
Andrew Monroe @monroeandrew
Chris Holden @profcjholden

You can contact Marginally Significant on Twitter (@marginallysig), through email ([email protected]), or on the web (marginallysignificant.fireside.fm/contact).

Links:

• How replicable are links between personality traits and consequential life outcomes? — Soto, C. J. (2019). How replicable are links between personality traits and consequential life outcomes? The Life Outcomes Of Personality Replication Project. Psychological Science, 30, 711-727.
• The Life Outcomes Of Personality Replication Project — The Life Outcomes Of Personality Replication (LOOPR) Project was conducted to estimate the replicability of the personality-outcome literature. For this project, we conducted preregistered, high-powered replications of 78 previously published associations between the Big Five personality traits and consequential life outcomes.