Hered to Walk the Another Trait of a Revolution Is That Once the Change Climate March in the Hague
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Think Big REVOLUTION Honours Magazine 2020: THINK BIG, It’s an Honour Honours College Social Sciences Utrecht University1 Think Big Think Big Preface Dear readers, In september a lot of students gathered to walk the Another trait of a revolution is that once the change climate march in The Hague. The trains were over- is made, there’s no turning back. This certainly crowded and about 30.000 people were going to counts for climate change. Every decision we make the Malieveld. This made me think we’re at the be- today will impact our future and future generations. ginning of a new kind of revolution. In the last cou- We not only need some revolutionary thoughts, but ple of years there’ve been a lot of paradigm shifts. also revolutionary actions to solve this problem. As We have found new insights in technology, science, Greta Thunberg said: “I don’t want you to be hope- gender and religion. All these topics have changed ful. I want you to panic. (...) I want you to act as if our mindsets and way of living. Nowadays we live the house was on fire, because it is.” This will be in a world where we walk around with Iphone’s, the first time in history that we have to make such where we can fly to every country and where wom- a big transition where time is the most important en are allowed to vote. Even though revolutionary variable. Therefore we will reflect in this magazine thoughts were needed to make these changes pos- on the revolutionary movements we face in 21st Marijn Sterre Huijers sible, it’s different from the climate revolution we’re century. From abortion to the replication crisis. You Chair facing now. Even though climate change is already will find interviews, articles, columns and informa- Linde Bekkers happening, we can’t see most of its consequences. tion all within the theme: ‘revolutionary’. Hopefully Vice-chair and treasurer It’s not clear what will happen if we continue living reflection on the past will help us to make better the way we do. This makes it such an abstract con- decisions for the future. And perhaps we will find Willemien Schouten cept and the discussion even harder. solutions in other revolutions. Secretary Noor Geluk Have a good read, Internal and external commissioner Redaccie 2 3 Think Big Think Big Index 8 Science in revolution: 12 The revolution of lan- 6 Science in revolution 14 Artificial intelligence vs. Open Science guage: An interview with genuine inequality Community Utrecht How Shakespeare would Diederik Stapel By Raphaële Xenidis By Anita Eerland have evolved 17 What went wrong with 46 References healthcare An interview with Annemieke Bijleveld 20 TED Talk review: 45 Recommendations How academic inflation is killing creativity 42 Did the Dutch musicians 22 Can a bill close the gen- 28 Studying in Rome, the close their eyes? 32 Committee der pay gap? eternal city An interview with introductions An interview with By Sophie Kramer Laurens Ham Lilianne Ploumen 36 The voice of the Realizing a paradigm 30 Nudge nudge: 9 out of 10 24 transformation through 41 Boost your career! unwanted children people read this article education By Jean-Luc Budel An interview with Kees van By Lars Tummers Helden and Chris Develing By Sofie Spierenburg 4 5 Think Big Think Big results were reproducible. This finding shocked both publications were based on fraudulent research data. 14% of scientists have observed colleagues falsifying, Science in revolution scientists and the general public, and made them Almost immediately, Stapel was fired and an extensive modifying or fabricating data, which indicates that An interview with Diederik Stapel question: Can scientific knowledge still be trusted? investigation through his work was started. fraudulent science is more common than we would like Written by Noor Geluk, editorial it to be. I thought it would be interesting to learn more committee Unfortunately, this is not the only example of an event The months and even years after, Diederik Stapel’s about why researchers commit fraud and what envi- that damaged the public’s trust in science. Perhaps the name and story dominated the headlines. The world ronmental factors In august 2015, the Open Science Collaboration pub- most (in)famous example of questionable practices in was shocked by Stapel’s deceit and condemned his might play a role. lished a research article called ‘Estimating the repro- the social sciences is that of Diederik Stapel. Before actions. In an interview with the New York Times, he And who better ducibility of psychological science’. In this study, 100 2011, Diederik Stapel was a well-respected social psy- was even announced as the biggest con man in aca- to learn from than psychological experiments were replicated in order to chologist at Tilburg University. However, in September demic science. Yet, what receives less attention in the from Diederik Sta- establish whether this would lead to the same results. 2011 his career as a researcher and professor came to media, is the cause of Stapel’s behavior and the role pel himself. What they found was that only 30% of the original a sudden stop when it came to light that most of his of the scientific culture. According to Fanelli (2009), always multiple explanations for certain behavior). This what role the scientific climate played in his behavior, To end the inter- The interview principle applied to his own behavior as well: It was a he answers that it is never nature or nurture. It is al- view on a positive Since 2011, when his fraud came to light, Diederik Sta- combination of growing up in a society that highly val- ways both; the question is in what proportion. Although note, I asked Sta- pel has talked about what happened on multiple occa- ues achievement, not being used to loss experiences Stapel emphasizes that he holds himself accountable pel if he had any sions: He has been interviewed many times, has given and doubts about the meaning of life that drove some for what happened, he thinks his environment played advice for students a TEDx talk and has even written a book about why he of the decisions that he made. What Stapel initially a part as well. One of the factors that he mentions is or researchers who did what he did. When asked why he does this instead liked about science is that it creates order in complex the pressure to perform that he felt while working at are just starting of staying away from the media, Stapel answers that phenomena. Science is about theories, explanations the university. When Stapel first started working as a their academic careers. The first piece of advice he he feels responsible. Especially towards students and and ultimately the truth. However, he soon found out researcher, he thought that all that mattered was the mentions is about the pressure to perform that he felt researchers, who are part of a system in which Stapel that science isn’t always unambiguous: The same ex- truth. However, as time went by, he realized that the while working at the university. “If you’re struggling to made his mistakes. By sharing his story, Stapel hopes periment does not always lead to the same result. This resources in science are scarce and in order for your excel, you don’t have to”, he says. “You don’t always that they can learn from these mistakes and not repeat is something Stapel found difficult. So difficult that he research paper to be published, it has to be catchy and have to get an 8 or a 9. Get out of that Honours class.” them. couldn’t accept it, which ultimately led him to modify- exciting. In an interview with the New York Times, Sta- Although I can’t help but hope that the Honours stu- ing, falsifying and even fabricating data. pel once said that it felt as if he was a salesman, trying dents reading this don’t follow up on that last instruc- However, that is not the only reason he mentions for to convince people to give him money for his research. tion, I do think it’s an interesting suggestion. Secondly, sharing his story. Besides the sense of duty, Sta- “The distinction between an Another interesting example that Stapel gives in re- Stapel advises young researchers and students to pel also talks about what happened in an attempt to Honours degree and a ‘regu- spect to the competition in universities are the Honours make sure to work together. Working alone made it understand his own behavior. Particularly his book lar’ degree implies that you colleges. To him, the distinction between an Honours much easier for Stapel to lie and “do stupid things”, as was important in this respect, because it allowed him are either a super student or degree or a ‘regular’ degree implies that you are either he said himself. He wouldn’t have been able to do that to examine his mind and ultimately explain his behav- a failed one.” a super student or a failed one. The question whether if more researchers were closely involved in his work. ior. When I ask him if he found this explanation, he this is a desirable development might be an interesting And finally, the last piece of advice Stapel has to offer answers6 that the difficult thing about psychology is Occasionally during the interview, I am reminded of topic for discussion. is something that might be applicable in every7 area of that behavior is always overdetermined (i.e. there are Stapel’s past in psychology.