53: Skin in the game - a podcast by Dan Quintana

Dan and James discuss whether you need to have “skin in the game” to critique research.
Here's what else they cover in the episode:Should scientists be required to communicate their science?
If your research is likely to be misinterpreted try and get out of in front of what's going to be saidWill science communication just become another metric?
The distinction between “science communication” and “science media”Who’s going to pay for all science communicators that we’ll need to communicate everyone’s science?
Dan and James mispronounce Dutch and German names and give a formal apology to the nation of The NetherlandsOutcome switching in clinical trials
Does having skin in the game guarantee expertise, or just wild biases?James’ recent desk rejection from a Journal Editor
Dan’s method to invite manuscript reviewers as an Associate EditorLinks:
The science communication Twitter thread https://twitter.com/ocaptmycapt/status/927193779693645825ERC comics https://www.erccomics.com
The “skin in the game” tweet https://twitter.com/paperbag1/status/914923706648055813That study in neuopsychopharmacology on a IL-6 receptor antibody to treat residual symptoms in schizophrenia https://www.nature.com/articles/npp2017258

Further episodes of Everything Hertz

Further podcasts by Dan Quintana

Website of Dan Quintana