I must admit, I had not heard of Daniël Lakens before. He is an assistant professor in applied cognitive psychology at the Eindhoven University of Technology who, aside from his research, is actively engaged with broader issues in science: from statistics to open science, as well as how to implement better reward structures.
He has recently given an interview to the “I Love Experimentation” blog on How good management leads to better science. Though he touches on various points, two things resonated the most with me:
- The importance of managers who understand that good research does not correlate with prestige or the number of publications. In his own words “If you try to improve the way you work, managers need to understand this will come at a cost. Being a highly productive crappy scientist is much easier than being a highly productive good scientist”.
- The value of considering problems within a historical context because some of the current ‘crises’ in science are not new and have been around for a long time. A recent Nature article gives a wonderful overview on the history of peer-review that clearly brings Daniël’s point home.
Needless to say, I’m glad I stumbled across his interview earlier this week. We’ll be sure to keep an eye on Daniël here at Labmosphere. If you’re interested, here’s a link to his twitter account.
Latest posts by Luiz (see all)
- The Missing Light at the End of the PhD Tunnel - July 12, 2016
- Job Stability not an Issue Just in Academic Research - May 27, 2016
- How Good Management Leads to Better Science - May 6, 2016