We discuss two recent plagiarism cases, one you've probably heard about and another that you probably haven't heard about if you're outside Norway. We also chat about the parallels between plagiarism and sports doping—would people reconsider academic dishonesty if they were reminded that future technology may catch them out? Here are some of the takeaways from the episode (generated with the help of AI): Plagiarism cases can range from minor academic practice issues to more serious instances of copying verbatim The detection and punishment of plagiarism can vary depending on the context, such as academic journals or internal university issues. The mindset and motivations behind plagiarism can differ between athletes and students, with athletes often driven by intense competition. Long-term detectability and the potential consequences of cheating are factors that may discourage individuals from engaging in plagiarism. Addressing plagiarism requires a balance between identifying genuine cases and avoiding ideological biases. Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2024, January 31) "177: Plagiarism", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/4M3F2

We chat about a paper on the invisible workload of open science and why academics are so bad at tracking their workloads. This episode was originally recorded in May 2023 in a hotel room just before our live recording of Episode 169, which is why we refer to the paper as a 'new' paper near the start of the episode. Links * The paper (https://journal.trialanderror.org/pub/the-invisible-workload/release/1) on the invisible workload of open research * Our live and in-person episode (https://everythinghertz.com/169) with Sandra Matz on using big data to understand behavior Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, December 29) "176: Tracking academic workloads", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U84JC

We chat about a recent blogpost from Dorothy Bishop, in which she proposes a Master course that will provide training in fraud detection—what should such a course specifically teach and where would these people work to apply their training? We also discuss whether open science is a cult that has trouble seeing outward. Links * The blog post (https://deevybee.blogspot.com/2023/11/defence-against-dark-arts-proposal-for.html) on the Master in dark arts defence from Dorothy Bishop * The blog post (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2023/11/29/why-i-continue-to-support-the-science-reform-movement-despite-its-flaws/) on whether open science is a cult from Andrew Gelman Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, December 7) "175: Defending against the scientific dark arts", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/K2J7N

James proposes proposes a new type of consortium paper that could provide collaborative opportunities for researchers from countries that are underrepresented in published research papers. We also talk about computational reproducibility and paper publication bonuses. Links The paper from Steve Lindsay on computational reproducbility: A Plea to Psychology Professional Societies that Publish Journals: Assess Computational Reproducibility (https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2023.4020) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, October 31) "174: Smug missionaries with test tubes", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/FBHRZ

Dan and James discuss a recent paper that investigated how science journalists evaluate psychology papers. To answer this question, the researchers presented science journalists with fictitious psychology studies and manipulated sample size, sample representativeness, p-values, and institutional prestige Links * The paper (https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231183912) on how science journalists evaluate psychology papers * The preprint paper (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.09.19.558509v1) on small samples * Laboratory Life (https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691028323/laboratory-life) by Bruno Latour Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, September 30) "173: How do science journalists evaluate psychology papers?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/SG4BM

Dan and James discuss a recent proposal to do away with discussion sections and suggest other stuff they'd like to get rid of from academic publishing. Links * The paper (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04267-3) on the proposed elimiation of the discussion section * The paper (https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920970949) on machine readable hypothesis tests * Our episodes (https://everythinghertz.com/guests/daniel-lakens) with Daniel Lakens * Our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/78) with Lisa DeBruine Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, August 31) "172: In defence of the discussion section", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/N3SFT

We chat with Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris about the science of cons and how we can we can avoid being taken in. We also cover the fate of the gorilla suit from the 'invisible gorilla' study, why scientists are especially prone to being fooled, plus more! Buy Daniel and Christopher's new book, Nobody's fool, from your favourite bookseller here (https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/daniel-simons/nobodys-fool/9781541602236/). Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, July 20) "171: The easiest person to fool is yourself (with Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F8SMR Special Guests: Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons.

We discuss evidence of data tampering in a series of experiments investigating dishonesty revealed via excel spreadsheet metadata and how traditional peer review is not suited for the detection of data tampering. Links Data colada post 1 (https://datacolada.org/109) The conceptual replication attempt (https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/7/2/28) in Guatemalan taxpayers The paper (https://rdcu.be/dfdS8) on using caution when applying behavioural science to policy Data colada post 2 (https://datacolada.org/110) The carthorse child (https://hackernoon.com/introducing-sprite-and-the-case-of-the-carthorse-child-58683c2bfeb#.o9um9unoj) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, June 23) "170: Holy Sheet", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DW2C7

In our first ever live and in-person episode, we chat with Sandra Matz about the opportunities and challenges for using big data to understand human behavior Links Everybody lies book (https://www.amazon.com/Everybody-Lies-Internet-About-Really/dp/0062390856), by Seth Stephens-Davidowitz A paper (https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-015-0630-z) on "Born open" data Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, May 31) "169: Using big data to understand behavior (Live episode with Sandra Matz)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/JDXHF Special Guest: Sandra Matz.

Dan and James discuss a new paper that reviews potential issues in metascience practices. They also talk about their upcoming live show in May in Frankfurt. Links Our upcoming show on May 8th, which will be a part of the at the 4th symposium on big data and research syntheses in psychology symposium (https://conference-service.com/ressyn-bigdata-2023/xpage.html?xpage=243&lang=en) to be held in Frankfurt, Germany The paper (https://journal.trialanderror.org/pub/questionable-metascience-practices/release/3) we discuss from Mark Rubin Peder Isager and team's paper on what to replicate (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34928679/) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, April 26) "168: Meta-meta-science", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CSJ3X

Dan and James chat about a new study that uses homeopathy studies to evaluate bias in biomedical research, a new-ish type of authorship fraud, and the potential for Chat GPT peer-review. Links The Chat GPT paper library tweet (https://twitter.com/michelnivard/status/1625786225725526016?s=20) The Homeopathy paper (https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(23)00010-0/fulltext) The David Grimes paper (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x) British dental journal paper on fraud (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-023-5514-5) The AHealthcareZ YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@ahealthcarez) The FittDesign Studio YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@fittdesign.studio) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, March 16) "167: Diluted effect sizes", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/H847F

Dan and James discuss a recent paper that claims that science is becoming less disruptive over time and the suggested causes for this decline. Links * Our prior episode (https://everythinghertz.com/165), which discussed PhD defences * The paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05543-x) on disruption in science * The news piece (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04577-5) on the paper Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, January 25) "166: Is science becoming less disruptive over time?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/X6YS5

Dan and James chat about self-promotion in academia, how they both wish they had doctoral defences (these aren't a thing in Australia), and replacing error bars with the letter "t". Links and stuff * The now retracted paper (https://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2022/3802603/) with the error bars as "t"s * A direct link (https://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2022/3802603/fig9/) to the figure * The blog post on self-promotion, titled "The End of Decency: When Self-Promotion Goes Too Far" https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2022/12/09/why-too-much-public-self-promotion-academics-damaging-opinion Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, December 30) "165: Self-promotion", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U2N9Q

James and Dan discuss the recent migration of scientists from Twitter to Mastodon and the pros and cons of sharing the prior submission history of manuscripts The Mastodon thread (https://mas.to/@SteinbockGroup/109385540133459884) discussion the submission history policy in American Chemical Society Journals The "Weekend at Bernies" film (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekend_at_Bernie%27s) Our new Mastodon account: @hertzpodcast@mas.to (https://mas.to/@hertzpodcast) James' leaf blower man haiku (https://techhub.social/@jamesheathers/109394055056309720) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, November 28) "164: The great migration", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/ZBJQS

Dan and James discuss eLife's new peer review model, in which they no longer make accept/reject decisions at the end of the peer-review process. Instead, papers invited for peer review will receive an assessment from eLife and the peer reviews will be shared on eLife's website. It's up to author if they would like revise their manuscript or publish their paper as the version of record. eLife's announment (https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/54d63486/elife-s-new-model-changing-the-way-you-share-your-research) A editorial (https://elifesciences.org/articles/83889) from Michael Eisen and team Episode 122 (https://everythinghertz.com/122): Reoptimizing scientific publishing for the internet age (with Michael Eisen) Episode 123 (https://everythinghertz.com/123): Authenticated anonymity (with Michael Eisen) A paper (http://www.ejwagenmakers.com/2009/IversonEtAl2009Agony.pdf) describing p-rep Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, November 7) "163: eLife's new peer review model", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/XYBU5

We chat about a recent preprint describing an experiment on the role of author status in peer-review, dodgy conference proceedings journals, and authorships for sale. Links * James' blogpost (https://jamesheathers.medium.com/publication-laundering-95c4888afd21) on conference proceedings journals * The preprint/working paper (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4190976) on status bias Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, October 17) "162: Status bias in peer review", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 110.17605/OSF.IO/WX2A7

Dan and James are joined by Brian Nosek (Co-founder and Executive Director of the Center for Open Science) to discuss the recent White House Office of Science Technology & Policy memo ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to federally funded research. They also cover the implications of this memo for scientific publishing, as well as the mechanics of culture change in science. Open Science Framework hits half a million users (https://www.cos.io/blog/celebrating-a-global-open-science-community) The White house memo (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/08-2022-OSTP-Public-Access-Memo.pdf) Brian on Twitter (https://twitter.com/BrianNosek) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, August 31) "161: The memo (with Brian Nosek)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/A7D86 Special Guest: Brian Nosek.

Dan and James share ten rules for whistleblowing academic misconduct. The Safe Faculty Project (https://www.safefacultyproject.org/) website SLAPP statues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategiclawsuitagainstpublicparticipation Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, August 31) "160: Whistleblowing", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/NFUJQ

Dan and James are joined by Saloni Dattani for a chat about the history of peer review, a reimagination of what peer review could look like, what happens when you actually pay peer reviewers, peer reviewer specialisation, post publication peer review, annual paper limits for authors, automation in peer review, and Big Cheese. Links * Works in Progress magazine (https://www.worksinprogress.co/) * One of the many news stories (https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/08/04/this-cheese-could-be-the-latest-superfood-with-unique-properties-to-improve-bone-health) about the Jarsberg cheese study * The actual study (https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/2022/06/29/bmjnph-2022-000424) * Saloni's peer review piece (https://www.worksinprogress.co/issue/real-peer-review/) * The F1000 format (https://f1000research.com/) * Our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/74) with Elisabeth Bik * PCI registered reports (https://rr.peercommunityin.org/) * Saloni on Twitter (https://twitter.com/salonium) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, August 15) "159: Peer review isn't working (with Saloni Dattani)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/PZS97 Special Guest: Saloni Dattani.

By popular demand, Dan and James chat about journal word and page limits.They also the debate around a recent meta-analysis on nudge interventions. Links * The PNAS nudge meta-analysis (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107346118) * The response letter (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2200300119) * The paper (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-022-04453-z) on adjectives and adverbs in life sciences Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, August 1) "158: Word limits", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3DY9J

Dan and James discuss a new preprint that examined the types of limitations authors discuss in their published articles and whether these limitation types has changed over the past decade, especially in light of methodological reform efforts. Links * The Genetic Lottery (https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691190808/the-genetic-lottery)by Kathryn Paige Harden * The limitations preprint (https://psyarxiv.com/n4eq7/) by Beth Clarke and collegues * Simine Vazire’s episode (https://everythinghertz.com/58) (also known as the one where Dan's wife starts going into labor) * The heartbeat paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945222000685) from Galvez-Pol and collegues * Rand Wilcox and robust statistical methods (https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-019-01246-w#article-info) * The tweet thread explainer (https://twitter.com/bethclarke_/status/1544646323684917248) from Beth Clarke Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, July 11) "157: Limitations", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/APCU3

Dan and James discuss a recent paper that concluded (again) that most researchers aren't compliant with their published data sharing statement and whether torrents (remember them?) are a viable alternative for sharing large datasets. Links * The data request paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S089543562200141X) * The paper (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/psyp.13688) Dan and James co-authored led by Julian Koenig * Our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/79) with Henry Drysdale * Our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/56) with Chris Chambers * The meta-psychology journal Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) ​ Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! ​ - $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, June 21) "156: Looking for seeders", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/4Q6JY

We chat about appeals to authority when responding to scientific critique, university ranking systems, Goodhart’s law (and its origin), and private institutional review boards. Links * The history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law) of Goodhart's law * The original (https://rdcu.be/cOraY) psychadelics paper in Nature Medicine * The critique (https://psyarxiv.com/a25wb/) * The response (https://psyarxiv.com/pdbf5/) to the critique Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, May 30) "155: Don't you know who I am?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VXBKS

We chat about the Theranos story and the parallels with academic research, as well as Twitter's new owner and whether academics will actually leave the platform Links * Mastodon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(band)) (the band) * Elon Musk’s Onion article (https://www.theonion.com/please-like-me-1848674003) * The Dropout podcast (https://abcaudio.com/podcasts/the-dropout/) * The Juicero (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juicero) * Bad Blood: The Final Chapter (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bad-blood-the-final-chapter/id1575738174) podcast by John Carreyrou *  "Macho Man" Randy Savage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Savage) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, May 9) "154: When the evidence is constructed around the narrative", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/45Z2J

We discuss a journal's new "wall of shame" page, which details unethical behaviours in an effort to discourage future misconduct. We also cover scientific ideas that won't die (but one idea that HAS died), and ECNP's "negative data" prize The audio quality of this recording isn't up to our usual standards as we were both travelling and without our normal recording gear. We'll be back with our normal gear next episode! Links * James’ letter to the editor/obituary (https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/expphysiol.2011.063867) on sympathovagal balance * The Mirror neuron book (https://www.amazon.com/Myth-Mirror-Neurons-Neuroscience-Communication/dp/0393089614) that Dan mentioned * The Wall of Shame (https://www.cureus.com/wall_of_shame) page * An archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20220412151018/https://www.cureus.com/wall_of_shame) of the Wall of Shame page if it gets taken down * A story (https://www.science.org/content/article/paul-brookes-surviving-outed-whistleblower) from 2014 on Paul Brooks and his Science Fraud website * Another story (https://retractionwatch.com/2014/03/11/so-what-happened-after-paul-brookes-was-forced-to-shut-down-science-fraud-org/) on Paul Brooks from Retraction Watch * News story: Missing Australian 'fraudster' could have cut off her own FOOT (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9338203/Missing-Australian-fraudster-cut-FOOT.html) to trick police into thinking she is dead, cops say after body part is found * Best Negative Data Prize (https://www.ecnp.eu/research-innovation/awards/best-negative-data-prize) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, April 18) "153: Shame shame shame", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/YZ8VG

James and Dan chat about apologies vs. non-apologies, how to decide when to call it quits on a paper, and governments vetoing research proposals recommended by their own funding agencies Links for stuff we mention * The tweet (https://twitter.com/seis_matters/status/1504456677176840195?s=20&t=26p1PhsNiUOaCVyAToadpg) from Chris Jackson that started it all * Chris Jackson's Hertz episode on the cumulative advantage of academic capital (https://everythinghertz.com/111) * The Science Diagrams that Look Like Shitposts twitter account (https://twitter.com/scienceshitpost) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, April 4) "152: Sorry Not Sorry", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WBVXZ

Dan and James discuss a new preprint that details twelve p-hacking strategies and simulates their impact on false-positive rates. They also discuss the Great Resignation in academia and the academic job market. Links * The twitter discussion (https://twitter.com/EikoFried/status/1504374568357617666?s=20&t=u5-8GBwxmEyxOUGbHjt9cw) on Associate editor pay kicked off by Eiko Fried * The p-hacking paper (https://psyarxiv.com/xy2dk/) from Angelika Stefan and Felix Schönbrodt * The sample size preprint (https://psyarxiv.com/9d3yf/) from Daniel Lakens Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, March 21) "151: The dirty dozen", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/KNM59

We discuss the latest paper to seriously use the Kardashian index, which is the discrepancy between a scientist's publication record and social media following, and a listener question on whether original authors should get the last word when a comment on an article is submitted Links * The paper (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/2/e052891) on citation impact and social media visibility of Great Barrington and John Snow signatories for COVID-19 strategy * The Rapid Responses (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/2/e052891.responses) comments on the paper * The peer review reports (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/suppl/2022/02/15/bmjopen-2021-052891.DC1/bmjopen-2021-052891.RH.pdf) for the paper * Send us an audio question (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question)! * About (https://pubpeer.com/static/about) PubPeer Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, February 28) "150: Why can't you do nothing?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7RPA4

Dan and James chat with cardiologist Rohin Francis about medical misinformation and how he uses YouTube for science communication via his 'Medlife Crisis' channel. Links to stuff that was mentioned: Rohin's YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgRBRE1DUP2w7HTH9j_L4OQ) Rohin on Twitter (https://mobile.twitter.com/medcrisis) Can you be so fit that you die video (https://youtu.be/hT8GZlBBv5k)? Why does getting in the water want to make you pee video (https://youtu.be/A-1hPjGvf3U) What is the stupidest nerve in the body video (https://youtu.be/wzIXF6zy7hg) Can you legally buy a human skeleton video (https://youtu.be/QcudPWsyxzk) The Tibbies YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC52kszkc08-acFOuogFl5jw) Up and atom YouTube Channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/UpandAtom) Belinda Carr YouTube Channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/BelindaCarr) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, February 14) "149: Medical misinformation (with Rohin Francis)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7RCMN Special Guest: Rohin Francis.

Dan and James chat about why academic reference letters are terrible, a recent position statement on preprints, and whether the "great resignation" is also happening in academia. Links to stuff that was mentioned: The tweet (https://twitter.com/eblissmoreau/status/1481784305911169027?s=20) from Dr. Eliza Bliss-Moreau on acedemic reference letter The tweet (https://twitter.com/giladfeldman/status/1483973974032007169?s=20&t=xVaPpN8q1v_bHNTvn-xrdQ) from Gilad Feldman about the 100 references he's submitted in 2020 alone The AMWA-EMWA-ISMPP joint position statement paper (https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2021.1900365) on medical publications, preprints, and peer review, Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, January 31) "148: Academic reference letters", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VZ67

We discuss the $7000 'accelerated publication' option for some Taylor & Francis journals that promises 3-5 week publication and a novel type of research fellowship. Details (https://taylorandfrancis.com/partnership/commercial/accelerated-publication/) for the accelerated publication The New Science 2022 Summer Fellowship (https://newscience.org/summer-fellowship/) We have new merch (https://everything-hertz-podcast.creator-spring.com/listing/metal-7594)! Use the discount code 'METAL' to get 20% off (valid until January 31st, 2022). Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2022, January 17) "147: The $7000 golden ticket", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VNPBJ

We answer a series of questions from a listener on whether to start a PhD, what to ask potential supervisors, the financial perils of being a PhD student, the future of higher education, the importance of skills, what keeps us going, and more. Here are the specific questions that we answered in this episode (the background to these questions is shared in the episode): Would you have any advice on how I can even decide whether to commence a PhD? Are there any questions in particular that you think are important to ask prospective supervisors? How do people make PhDs work financially? You are supposed to treat the degree like a regular 40 hour/ week job (and students commonly fail to do so). However, what full-time job pays ~$540 per week and expects this?! You are not supposed to work > 8 hours/ week outside of this?! I thought I could at least work 2-3 full days a week if I needed to. Why do people generally leave academia, or not continue, after their PhD, despite obvious potential? In what form do you think universities will be around in 5 and 10 years? Are one-year progress reports from the PhD committee enough to stay on track? What utility do PhDs hold inside and outside of academia? Apparently, skills matter more than a topic, and you have a better chance of getting a postdoc etc... if you have worked on a hot topic with a well-known supervisor. How can one start the PhD prepared enough to finish it on time and earlier? I am wondering what keeps academics going. I may be jaded, but lab environments don’t seem collaborative, and academics seem to be ruled by the admin people and hedge fund managers (or whoever). They also seem to make their money off students (i.e., the customer). I see a reverence for science and people trying to game the system, but not people wanting to seek truth in science. I now wonder how much of academia is motivated by pride, comfort, and not knowing what else to do. In my mind (and I am exaggerating a little), the PhD journey is coming to resemble an abusive relationship between the student and the uni, facilitated by the supervisor who hopefully gets something out of it. I assume it only gets worse from here. I have been told that the PhD is the only program that offers solid research training and the ability to do your original research (something an industry job does not offer). Even if I accept those premises, I now wonder what it is all for. Where do you both see yourselves in 5 and 10 years? What keeps you both going? We have new merch (https://everything-hertz-podcast.creator-spring.com/listing/metal-7594)! Use the discount code 'METAL' to get 20% off (valid until January 31st, 2022). Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, December 27) "146: Skills pay bills", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/PUW6N

We discuss the results from the cancer biology reproducibility project, the inevitable comparisons with reproducibility in psychology, and authorship expectations for posting public datasets. Links * The paper (https://elifesciences.org/articles/71601) investigating the replicability of preclinical cancer biology * The paper (https://academic.oup.com/ej/article-abstract/131/635/1250/5824166) on the impact of alphabetical order on career outcomes in economics (whose authorship order are determinedby alphabetical order * That human sports science paper (https://pubpeer.com/publications/28EA24F1ABCFF6CD121B167A9A68BB) that inlcluded a cranionotomy Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, December 13) "145: Our boat is sinking slightly slower", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/634QJ

If your child asked you whether they should pursue a career in academia, what would you say? We discuss this question plus three more quick-fire topics: the death of expertise, memorable presentations, and including internships in more graduate programs Links * Get a 30% discount on a Scite subscription for a year, just use the coupon code EVERYTHINGHERTZ via this link (https://scite.ai/?via=everythinghertz) * The “Remind me of this later” twitter bot (https://twitter.com/remindme_ofthis) * The Chase, Chance, and Creativity book (https://www.amazon.com/Chase-Chance-Creativity-Lucky-Novelty/dp/0262511355) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, November 15) "144: The role of luck in academia", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/BKAH6

Dan and James discuss the differences between 'talk' and 'action' in scientific reform and why reforms are taking such a long time to be realised. They also chat about whether messy (but correct) code is worse than no code at all, and revisit the grad student who never said "no" (https://web.archive.org/web/20170312041524/http:/www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no). Other links * Get a 30% discount on a Scite subscription for a year, just use the coupon code EVERYTHINGHERTZ via this link (https://scite.ai/?via=everythinghertz) * James' blog post on why he loves preprints (https://jamesheathers.medium.com/why-i-love-pre-prints-9d727eeb22b8) * The grad student who never said "no" (archived) blog post (https://web.archive.org/web/20170312041524/http:/www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, November 1) "143: A little less conversation, a little more action", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/X75SZ

In this live episode, Dan and James discuss red flags in academia, in terms of research fields, papers, and individuals. Thanks to everyone that participated in this live event! Links to stuff that was mentioned Get a 30% discount on a Scite subscription for a year, just use the coupon code EVERYTHINGHERTZ via this link (https://scite.ai/?via=everythinghertz) The p-hacker app (https://shinyapps.org/apps/p-hacker/) Burro racing on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pack_burro_racing) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, October 18) "142: Red flags in academia [Live episode]", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3YB47

We chat with Sakshi Ghai (University of Cambridge) about why we should diversify sample diversity and retire the Western, educated, rich, industrialized and democratic (WEIRD) dichotomy in the behavioral sciences Links to stuff we discuss: Sakshi's piece (https://rdcu.be/cyKEQ) in Nature Human Behavior Many Labs 2 paper (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2515245918810225) The ‘helicopter' research piece (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01795-1) Joseph Heinrich’s recent book, The WEIRDest People in the World (https://www.amazon.com/WEIRDest-People-World-Psychologically-Particularly-ebook/dp/B07RZFCPMD) Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, September 20) "141: Why we should diversify study samples (with Sakshi Ghai)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/J9E6W Special Guest: Sakshi Ghai.

James proposes that peer review reports should be published as their own citable objects, provided that the manuscript author thinks that the peer review report is of sufficient quality and the peer reviewers agree Other links and things we discuss * An update on James’ start up job * The American service industry * Dan’s first outing since the pandemic started * The villlage of Hell (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell,_Norway), in Norway * The villiage of Fucking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugging,_Upper_Austria) (now changed to Fugging) in Austria * The Hertz long term archive (https://osf.io/zj7y3/) on Open Science Framework * We’re up for doing a syllabus episodes that you can assign to your classes * Dan’s recent piece (https://rdcu.be/cx3H0) in Nature Human Behavior on replication projects for undergraduate research theses * What about a replication study as part of a PhD thesis? * The trope of, “future replications are needed’ * Collaborative Replications and Education Project (CREP (https://osf.io/wfc6u/)) * Daniel Lakens mentioning (https://twitter.com/lakens/status/1435696324708642816?s=20) that his paper might be the most cited Frontiers article ever * How thorough should peer review be? * James' new articles isn't online yet, but he will pin it to his Twitter profile as soon as it is * The Julian Koenig-led paper (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/psyp.13688) James mentioned (that Dan and James are co-authors on) * The Psychophysiology liviing meta-analysis (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/psyp.13933) article Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, September 20) "140: You can’t buy cat biscuits with ‘thank you’ emails", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/BW65N

We chat with Ashley Farley about her background as an academic librarian, the underrecognised importance of copyright in academic publishing, and her work as a Program Officer at the Gates Foundation An academic librarian’s perpsective on the importance of open reseasch The importance of copyright in research and what it means signing over your copyright The PDF crisis! What does a program officer at a grant funding organsiation do? Why should funding organisations care about open science? Why open access is more than just about acacemic papers, but extends to posters and presentations Why can't academics collectively decide to push back against the big publishers? The difference between private funders vs. goverment funding agencies Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, September 6) "139: Open science from a funder's perspective (with Ashley Farley)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/FQXSZ Special Guest: Ashley Farley.

We chat with Michele Avissar-Whiting about her role as the Editor-in-chief of the Research Square preprint platform and how she weighs up the benefits and costs of potentially problematic preprints during a pandemic. Notes, links, and stuff we cover: * The Journal Ghoul (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1425421173366693891?s=20) reference in the intro * Michele’s role as a the editor for a preprint server * How Research Square (https://researchsquare.com) works * Weighing up the urgency of preprints vs. potential danger * The preprint-to- hype pipeline * The Scholarly Kitchen piece (https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/02/24/open-access-conspiracy-theories-and-the-democratization-of-knowledge/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ScholarlyKitchen+%28The+Scholarly+Kitchen%29) on knowledge democratization * Badges for preprints * The recent withdrawal of a preprint Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, August 16) "138: Preprints in the time of coronavirus (with Michele Avissar-Whiting)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/AU8PW Special Guest: Michele Avissar-Whiting.

Dan and James share their thoughts on a recent paper (https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009124) that proposes ten rules for improving academic work-life balance for early career researchers and the figure from this paper that became a meme. Here are the rules: Long hours do not equal productive hours Examine your options for flexible work practices Set boundaries to establish your workplace and time Commit to strategies that increase your efficiency and productivity Have a long-term strategy to help with prioritization, and review it regularly Make your health a priority Regularly interact with family and friends Make time for volunteer work or similar commitments that are important and meaningful to you Seek out or help create peer and institutional support systems Open a dialogue about the importance of work–life balance and advocate for systemic change Dan mentioned an app he sometimes uses to track his time, called Timery (https://timeryapp.com/). Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, August 2) "137: Ten rules for improving academic work-life balance", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7F3KN

We discuss Journal Reviewer (journalreviewer.org), which is a website that provides a forum for researchers to share and rate their experiences with journal's peer review processes. We also cover how some journals negotiate the way in which their impact factors are calculated. Links The reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Whittington) to James' mention of Dick Whittington James’ RIOT science talk (https://youtu.be/t733sc9xhtw) Nichola's Raihani's tweet (https://twitter.com/nicholaraihani/status/1415308025179656194?s=20) https://journalreviewer.org/ The South Park Yelp episode (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You%27re_Not_Yelping) Other links Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, July 19) "136: Who peer-reviews the peer-reviewed journals?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/5SH2Z

Dan Quintana and James Heathers chat about well-known psychology studies that we've now lost confidence in due to replication failures and the role of auxiliary assumptions in hypothesis-driven research. Other links The reversals in psychology website (https://www.gleech.org/psych) Anne Scheel and team's paper (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691620966795) on whether you’re ready to test hypotheses Homer Simpson burning bridges meme (https://youtu.be/PnnXc3T_pK8) The paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.003) that suggests replications will make psychology too boring and nobody will want to study it Daniel Lakens’ blog post (http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-judges.html) on the hungry judges study Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, July 5) "135: A loss of confidence", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/GHKRC

We discuss a recent retraction triggered by the authors not paying a copyright fee to use a questionnaire (that also happened to be critical of the original questionnaire). Links for stuff that we mention: The paper (https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-021-00427-9) that was retracted for not getting the correct licence for a questionnaire The retraction notice (https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-021-00446-6) for this paper The Spectrum piece (https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/copyright-claim-prompts-retraction-of-study-on-alexithymia-in-autism/) that discusses this story Why most online recipes begin with some ridiculous story (https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks-protected-by-copyright/#:~:text=Recipes%20can%20be%20protected%20under,anecdotes%20alongside%20a%20recipe's%20ingredients) Libkey (https://libkey.io/), which provides one-click access to papers via your institutional library subscription Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, June 21) "134: Paywalled questionnaires", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/76KTY

Some journals use nominal manuscript submission fees to discourage frivolous submissions. However, it has been suggested that increasing submission fees could reduce article processing charges. Dan and James discuss this proposal, along with the recently released code of conduct for scientific integrity from the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. James’ Atlantic piece (https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/06/microchipped-vaccines-15-minute-investigation/619081/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_term=2021-06-03T12%3A00%3A56&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_campaign=the-atlantic) Submission fees for mansucripts The scholarly kitchen blog post (https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/09/20/plan-t-scrap-apcs-and-fund-open-access-with-submission-fees/) We have a new partner: Paperpile! (http://paperpile.com/) Our PeerJ episode (https://everythinghertz.com/48) with Jason Hoyt The code of conduct (https://zenodo.org/record/4707560#.YLzReTaA4-Q) for scientific integrity from the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences Everything Hertz on social media - Dan on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Music credits Our outro music is by Lee Rosevere (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, June 7) "133: Manuscript submission fees", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/5MAQN

Dan and James discuss how academia should operate in a post-pandemic world. What pandemic practices should we keep and what should we abandon? Links and details: Quiz: Norwegian metal band or Norwegian town? Things are slowly getting back to normal in some (but not alI) countries. So what academic practices and routines should we keep from the pandemic and what should we kiss goodbye? Would it be possible to be physically located at your local university but to be employed/educated at another university? Video abstracts are now an option is some journals, here's an example (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpcu.13015) Presentations might be more convenient online, but it's hard to replicate a good poster session What is the actual point of academic conferences? The neuromatch academy https://academy.neuromatch.io/ The neuromatch academy paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661321000954?dgcid=author) in Trends in Cognitive Sciences Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, May 17) "132: Post-pandemic academia", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/FAU7Z

Dan and James answer listener audio questions on indirect costs for research grants, the mind/body problem, and why many academics aren't trained to teach. They also profess their love for the overhead projector Some more details: * Should we require universities to justify overhead costs, like heating and electricity? * Overheads can inflate the costs of grants, some grants provide an additional percentage for overheads but others don’t allow this, which can eat into grants * Get to know the people in your local grant office! * Indirect costs at MIT (https://ras.mit.edu/facilities-and-administrative-fa-rates) * A primer (https://web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/295/zuber.html) on indirect costs and why they are important to MIT * Does it matter that we address the mind body problem in psychology? * On the teaching of the history and philosophy of science (or lack thereof) in psychology courses * Why aren’t academics better equipped to teach? * The 3Blue1Brown YouTube channel (http://www.3blue1brown.com/) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, May 3) "131: Long live the overhead projector!", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/8TFKC

Dan and James chat with Dorothy Bishop (University of Oxford) about the importance of normalizing the retraction of scientific papers, publication ethics, and whether paper mills (companies that make fake papers at scale) are an issue in the psychological sciences Here are some links and stuff we covered: Dorothy's thoughts on how the adoption of open science practices has been progressing since we last had her on the show in June 2018 The European Research Council's new open access journal, which is free to publish in if you're ERC funded Dan's proposal of something similar in a 2019 The Chronicle piece (https://www.chronicle.com/article/how-to-bring-prestige-to-open-access-and-make-science-more-reliable) (free to read with email signup) Dorothy's recent blogpost (http://deevybee.blogspot.com/2021/03/time-for-publishers-to-consider-rights.html) on publication ethics The Society for Microbiology piece (https://asm.org/Articles/2021/March/Publication-Ethics-Barriers-in-Resolving-Figure-C) behind the blogpost Our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/74) with Elisabeth Bik Image manipulation in scientific papers Why don't publishers have agreements with authors that if they discover something dodgy in papers the author can't sue them? Retraction notices don't easily discriminate between fraud and mistakes, and this is one reason why that authors are so reluctant to have their work retracted James' fictional paper mill story (https://osf.io/ds6hk/) (based on real fraud), that he wrote with Otto Kalliokoski Are paper mills a problem in psychology? Dorothy's Oxford photo challenge (https://twitter.com/hashtag/OxPhotoQuiz?src=hashtag_click) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, April 19) "130: Normalizing retractions (with Dorothy Bishop)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/HRXU2 Special Guest: Dorothy Bishop.

Dan and James discuss the recently proposed "transparency audit", why it received so much blowback, and the characteristics of successful reform schemes The specifics... The computational research integrity conference (https://cri-conf.org/) The transparancy leaderboard (https://etiennelebel.com/cs/t-leaderboard/t-leaderboard.html) proposed by Curate Science (https://curatescience.org/app/home) Our episode with Chris Jackson (https://everythinghertz.com/111), that James mentioned What about a transparency leaderboard for instiutions? What are the characteristics of grassroots reform schemes that worked? Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, April 5) "129: Transparency audits", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/JRNP8

Dan and James chat about how they come up with new ideas, why everyone seems to be trying to monetise their hobbies, and why it's so hard for most labs to have a singular focus of research. We had some problems with James' mic so the quality of his audio wasn't up our usual standard. To make up for this we've added one of our older bonus episodes at the end of this conventional episode (this begins at 54:18). These bonus episodes are typically only made available for our Professor Fancypants Patreon patrons, but now you'll get to hear one! Other notes and links: The half-serious "Highlander" bounty program from Noah Haber (https://twitter.com/NoahHaber/status/1370045749287923715?s=20) The metapsy journal (https://open.lnu.se/index.php/metapsychology/about) How do we come up with new ideas? What James watches and listens to in his spare time The urge to monetise your hobby The "Let's do nothing (https://www.amazon.com/Lets-Do-Nothing-Tony-Fucile/dp/0763652695)" kids book "How to Do Nothing (https://www.amazon.com/How-Do-Nothing-Resisting-Attention/dp/1612197493)" by Jenny Odell Robert Provine's Laughter as a scientific problem: (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26131571/) An adventure in sidewalk neuroscience The value of including many experiments in a single paper Is there too much reform happening in psychology? Clubhouse and the new twitter clone, 'Spaces' (still in beta) Bonus episode 15: The true truth of pre-registration (https://www.patreon.com/posts/34414977) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, March 15) "128: How do you generate new research ideas?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U79NW

We discuss when is the right time in your academic career to begin speaking up to critique your research field or whether the risk of retaliation means you should shut up and keep your head down. This was a recorded Clubhouse chat, which includes some audience interaction at the end. Links and details: Moin Syed's blogpost (http://getsyeducated.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-time-for-criticism-is-now.html), which was the inspiration for this topic The 'proper' letter to the editor critique vs. a social media critique What about retaliation for speaking out? Differences between industry and academia Thank you to Yan, Louis, Evan for their contribitions to our chat! Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation

We have a wide-ranging chat with Saloni Dattani (Kings College London and University of Hong Kong) about the benefits of dividing scientific labor, the magazine she co-founded (Works in Progress) that shares novel ideas and stories of progress, and fighting online misinformation Here are some links and other stuff we cover Follow Saloni on Twitter: https://twitter.com/salonium Why Saloni started the Works in Progress (https://worksinprogress.co/) magazine Overleaf (overleaf.com), for writing papers in LaTeX How science will benefit from the division of labour Public writing vs. scientific writing Why has behavioral science not been very useful in curbing the pandemic? A paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378378220302929) suggested a link between digit ratio (2D:4D) and sex differences in COVID fatalities, and another paper (https://psyarxiv.com/ht74e/) debunking this claim A paper (https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-are-bald-men-at-greater-risk-of-severe-coronavirus-illness) suggesting baldness is a coronavirus risk factor, without controlling for age Should peer-review be abolished altogether? Paper link (https://academic.oup.com/bjps/advance-article/doi/10.1093/bjps/axz029/5526887) The Japanese mathematician (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/math-mystery-shinichi-mochizuki-and-the-impenetrable-proof/) who solved an "impossible" conjecture and posted the papers on his website Reforms are more likely by work by chipping away at smaller problems, rather trying to fix everyting Google dataset search https://datasetsearch.research.google.com/ The COVIDfaq.co website Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Buy our Merch here: https://everything-hertz-podcast.creator-spring.com/ Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, February 15) "126: The division of scientific labor (with Saloni Dattani)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VJA4S Special Guest: Saloni Dattani.

Dan has a blue-sky proposal to increase data sharing—that funders mandate scholars to store and analyse data on their servers for which the funder decides what constitutes a reasonable data request (among other benefits) Other stuff covered: We return with part 2 of "overrated/underrated/appropately rated", in which James throws nouns at Dan and he responds with whether these things are overrated, underrated, or appropately rated. Joe Hilgard's blog post (http://crystalprisonzone.blogspot.com/2021/01/i-tried-to-report-scientific-misconduct.html) Dan' proposal that funders should require all funded researchers to store and perform their analysis on a central server, which would make it easier to share data, and then the funder could decide what "upon reasonable request" means, not the reseacher or the instution Long term vs. short term reform efforts Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, February 1) "125: Upon reasonable request ", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/HR5JA

We discuss under which circumstances retracting decades-old articles is worth the time. We also chat about why LinkenIn is underrated (yes, really) and special journal issues are overrated. A more specific list of topics and links: We play a game of "overated/underated", in which Dan has a list of stuff that he asks James whether these things are overrated or underated (or appropiated rated) Why LinkedIn is underated Graphical abstracts are underrated Online conferences are underrated Authors should have the chance to wildly speculate (as long as it's marked as wild speculation) Sourdough bread is so gorgeous that even hipsters can't ruin it Special journal themes are overrated Should we bother putting the energy into retracting old studies? The retracted article (https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/512536) that Eysenck co-authored, entitled “Coffee-Drinking and Personality as Factors in the Genesis of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease” THIS (https://youtu.be/TNScPDSRCzI) is Takeshi's Castle Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, January 18) "124: From Ptolemy to Takeshi's Castle", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DG3PY

Part two of our chat with Michael Eisen (eLife Editor-in-Cheif), in which we discuss the pros and cons of collaborative peer review, journal submission interfaces, Michael's take on James' proposal that peer reviewers should be paid $450 dollars, why negative comments on peer reviews need to be normalised, plus much more. Some more details: - The pros and cons of collaborative peer review (in which all peer reviewers discuss the paper after all individual peer reviews have been submitted - How technology can constrain journal operations - The strange engineered delay in paper reviews (I doesn't take 2-3 weeks to review a paper) - Michael's proposal for a system in which people can nominate they have time in the near future to review a paper and then papers can be sent to them so they're rapidly reviewed - Journal submission interfaces - Michael's take on paying peer reviewers - Who owns peer reviews? - Would negative (anonomous or not) comments on an open peer review report penalise authors in the future? - Every paper gets negative peer-review comments, this doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad paper - Michael proposes an explicit "speculation" section for papers, where authors get free reign to basically say whatever they want Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Special Guest: Michael Eisen.

The internet should have transformed science publishing, but it didn't. We chat with Michael Eisen (Editor-in-Chief of eLife (https://elifesciences.org/)) about reoptimizing scientific publishing and peer review for the internet age. Here what we cover and some links: How Michael co-founded PLOS (https://plos.org/) The book Dan mentioned on the history of the scientific journal (https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo28179042.html) Why did eLife launch? What did it offer that other journals didn't? Nature's recently proposed $11k article processing fee proposal eLife's new "author-driven publishing" approach (https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64910), in which all submitted papers have to be posted as preprints Part two of our conversation will be released on January 4, 2021 Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) - Our merch store (https://everything-hertz-podcast.myteespring.co/), with mugs, shirts, hoodies + more Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! One dollar a month: a twenty percent discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - Five dollars a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, December 21) "122: Reoptimizing scientific publishing for the internet age (with Michael Eisen)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/USYFC Special Guest: Michael Eisen.

Dan and James discuss the pros and cons of transparent peer-review, in which peer review reports are published alongside manuscripts, as a keynote feature at the recent Munin Conference on scholarly publishing. Here's what they cover and some links: Watch the video of this episode (https://youtu.be/1Xp3IXaq970) on the Everything Hertz YouTube page What is transparent peer-review? The permanancy of open peer review reports CLOCKSS (https://clockss.org/) provides a sustainable dark archive to ensure the long-term survival of Web-based scholarly content Open peer reviews provide additional info for historians What changes when you know that your review is going to be public? A Motte-and-bailey castle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_castle) An update and summary of the 450 movement (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd) Involving patients/user representatives in the peer review and disemination process The GRIM test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRIM_test) What about the publication of peer review reports for papers that are rejected? The mega-analysis paper (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/psyp.13688) that Dan and James were co-authors on Thank you to the organisers of the Munin conference for the invitation! Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! One dollar a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - Five dollars a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, December 7) "121: Transparent peer review", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/S2948

Dan and James chat with Cailin O'Connor (University of California, Irvine) about the how false beliefs spread in science and remedies for this issue Here's what they cover: Why should psychologist scientists learn about the philosophy of science? Cailin's new preprint on error propogation that she co-authrored Boyd and Richerson's "Culture and the Evolutionary Process" book (https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo5970597.html) Episode 91 with Kristin Sainani (https://everythinghertz.com/91) that discussed magnitude based inference Christie Aschwanden (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-shoddy-statistics-found-a-home-in-sports-research/) on Magnitude Based Inference The Misinformation age (https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300234015/misinformation-age), co-authored by Cailin Cailin's paper on the retraction of scientific papers (http://cailinoconnor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Retractions_in_Epistemic_Networks-2.pdf) With Scite, you can be alterted whether a given paper has been retracted Where should you start if you're interested in the philosophy of science? Science as social knowledge (https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691020518/science-as-social-knowledge), by Helen Longino Cailin's on Twitter (https://twitter.com/cailinmeister) and you should also check out her website (http://cailinoconnor.com/) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, November 16) "120: How false beliefs spread in science (with Cailin O'Connor", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6S8TB Special Guest: Cailin O'Connor.

Dan and James discuss how rules of thumbs in science, such as those often applied to sample sizes and effect sizes, lead to mindless research evaluation. More info and links: Is there any justifcation for holding back the public posting of data becuase you're not done with your analyses We have a new episode partner, Scite (https://scite.ai/)! Scite helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research Get a 30% discount on a 12-month Premium Scite subscription. Use the coupon code: HERTZ (offer expires January 1, 2021) Lake Wobegon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon), were all the children are above average The tweet from Marco Altini (https://twitter.com/altini_marco/status/1321432168216858625) about his desk-rejected manuscript Sample size rules-of-thumb Effect size rules-of-thumb Dan's effect size distribution paper (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27914167/) (Here's the preprint (https://osf.io/5y55v/) if you don't have access to the paywalled version) We have a live episode scheduled for the 18 November (4pm CET) as part of the Munin Conference on Scholarly Publising (https://site.uit.no/muninconf/) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, November 2) "119: Rules of thumb", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/UMXR7

Dan and James answer audio listener questions on the worst review comments they've received (and how the responded), their thoughts on the current state of preprints, and how institutional prestige influences researcher evaluations. Other points and links: Send in your audio question at our website (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) Listen to our episode with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti (https://everythinghertz.com/107), on memes, TikTok, and science communication The worst peer reviewers we have received How do we respond to bad peer review comments The Research Square (https://www.researchsquare.com/publishers/in-review) preprint server The current state of preprints The 'readiness scale' paper (https://rdcu.be/b8G3m) at Nature Human Behavior How the prestige of one's institition affects how they are assessed The mathematician Grigori Perelman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman), who declined the Fields medal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Medal) The Laboratory Life book (https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691028323/laboratory-life) Double-blinded peer-review Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, October 19) "118: Evidence-free gatekeeping", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RAVXK

Dan and James choose a preprint and walk through how they would peer-review it. James also provides an update on his recent proposal that scientists should be paid for performing peer reviews for journals published by for-profit companies Specific links and topics: An update on the 450 movement (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd), which proposes that scientists should be paid for performing peer reviews for journals published by for-profit companies You should follow Overly Honest Editor (https://twitter.com/Edit0r_At_Large) on Twitter The Volkswagen fellowships (https://www.volkswagenstiftung.de/en/funding/our-funding-portfolio-at-a-glance/freigeist-fellowships) Emma Mills (http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/emma-mills(edc1db6a-ca34-4086-b16f-95dd24534887).html), from Lancaster University, asks us how we review papers We review this paper: "Direct perception of other people’s heart rate (https://psyarxiv.com/7f9pq)" The tweet from Maarten van Smeeden (https://twitter.com/MaartenvSmeden/status/1310210069779316737?s=20) on data simulation Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, October 5) "117: How we peer-review papers", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7JHFP

Dan and James chat about a recent twitter discussion on open science funding and the benefits of Editors sharing their opinions online. James also shares three project proposals that he thinks deserves funding, which Dan ranks. Other stuff... The Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/tage_rai/status/1304985745157914624?s=20) from Tage Rai on conflicts of interest in funding on science The Raytheon Amphitheater (http://www.northeastern.edu/egan/raytheon.html) at Northeastern University How Nature Human Behavior evaluates your mansucripts (https://rdcu.be/b7otB), from episode 105 (https://everythinghertz.com/105). Good and bad experiences with Frontiers journals A contract (https://osf.io/5ey8g/) for getting paid for reviews Get access to our Patreon newsletter (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) The peer-review process (https://reviewer.elifesciences.org/reviewer-guide/review-process) at eLife James' three grant proposal ideas The taxi story (https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/21LV4B/topp-professor-tok-taxi-for-en-halv-mill-paa-det-offentliges-regning) [Story in Norwegian but Google translate does a good enough job] PsycoPy (https://www.psychopy.org/) The eyetracker that's 100x cheaper (https://rdcu.be/b7s0q) than commercial eyetrackers Ads in R package load up messages Chat about this episode on the Git Gud Science Discord server (https://discord.gg/n7ty4EQ) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, September 21) "116: In my opinion", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WT46Z

We discuss James' recent proposal that scientists should be paid for performing peer review for journals published by for-profit companies—$450, to be precise. Dan also puts forward three meta-science projects that he thinks are worth funding. More details * James' tweet (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1301533455520608256?s=20) proposing peer review should be compensated * Since recording this episode, James has set up the @450Movement twitter account (https://twitter.com/450movement) * Also see James' blog post (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd) * The Collabra Psychology (https://www.collabra.org/) journal * Did the folks that co-authored the "redefine statistical sigificance (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0189-z)" paper actually go on to follow their own recommendations? * Would high financial compensation of people on job search panels lead to better quality hires? * A tool that would automatically scrape the email addresses the of authors of papers you cite would make life easier for asking for feedback and providing review recommendations. * I'm curious as to whether people are reading the show notes. If you are reading this and want a Hertz mug, the first person to send @hertzpodcast (https://twitter.com/hertzpodcast) a tweet saying they read the show notes will get a free mug * Kristoffer Magnusson's statstics art (https://rpsychologist.com/viz) * Join the Git Gud Science Discord by following this link: https://discord.gg/s8MN3gA Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month - Save 16% on either tier if you pay annually! Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, September 7) "115: A modest proposal", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/4ZQ2E

We chat with Jess Wade (Imperial College London) about diversity issues in science, including her work increasing the profile of underrepresented scientists on Wikipedia and on getting more young women into science. Here's what we cover: Jess' Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jess_Wade) Inferior (https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/553867/inferior-by-angela-saini/), by Angela Saini What's involved when making a bio page? The "notability" criteria for adding a scientist's bio on wikipedia Listen to Wikipedia grow on Hatnote (http://listen.hatnote.com/) Don't write your own page, even under a psuedonym. What's the best way to get girls into science and engineering? The lack of diversity in science award winners Follow Jess on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jesswade)! The opportunuties provided by social media Using social media to scope out new labs Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, August 16) "114: Diversity in Science (with Jess Wade)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/A6VMU Special Guest: Jess Wade.

Dan and James discuss whether scientists should spend more time creating and editing Wikipedia articles. They also chat about how they read scientific articles and the heuristics they use to help decide whether a paper's worth their time. Here are some more details and links: Send in your audio questions here (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) How does James read so much and what tips do Dan and James have for reading papers? The Stork (https://www.storkapp.me/) paper recommendation service How James and Dan rapidly judge whether a paper is worth the time to read The benefit of a memorable paper title Peer review forces you to read papers carefully James screens a few papers for further reading on the spot based on their titles What is the role of Wikipedia in science communication and education? Jess Wade's (https://twitter.com/jesswade) project advocating for better representation of female scientists on Wikipedia Wikipedia articles vs. textbooks Do we even need textbooks in psychology? The Biological Psychology wiki textbook (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Biological_Psychology) is a ghost town Using the R bookdown package (https://bookdown.org/home/) for online books Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, August 3) "113: Citation needed", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3D6YJ

Dan and James chat about James' new industry job, why he quit academia, the biggest differences between academia and industry, and why it's crucial for early career researchers to have a plan B. James new industry job James' medium blog post (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/i-quit-be062295f638) Having a plan B (and plan C) in academia Using consulting a bridge to a full-time industry job How to get an industry job The role of grant success in academia More research is now open access than not Get 20% off our merch (https://teespring.com/en-GB/stores/everything-hertz-podcast) by using the promo code "AUGUST" It's now easier to not be employed in academia but still contribute to academia The NBA bubble (https://slate.com/culture/2020/07/nba-bubble-coronavirus-orlando-life.html) The Oura ring (https://ouraring.com/) Differences in work/life balance between academia and industry Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Cite this episode Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, July 27) "112: Leaving academia", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DAZ7S

We chat with Chris Jackson (Imperial College, London) about the "Matthew Effect" in academia, how we can improve work/balance, and whether we should stop citing shitty people. Here's more stuff we cover: Chris climbed the world's most dangerous volcano for a BBC show (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09hlzbb) Chris' email signature Having a code of conduct for your lab Work/life balance in academia Are things worse in academia compared to other desk jobs? How Chris co-founded "EarthArxiv", a preprint server for the earth sciences The point/counterpoint article format (here (https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00604.2017) is an example) Open science in the geosciences Requesting data from authors Follow Chris on Twitter (https://twitter.com/seis_matters) Issues with bibliometrics Should we stop citing shitty people? The long wait to get your work expenses reiumbursed Other links - Dan on twitter (https://twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on [twitter]((https://twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (https://twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Cite this episode Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, July 6) "111: The cumulative advantage of academic capital (with Chris Jackson)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/KJ76G Special Guest: Chris Jackson.

We answer a listener question on identifying red flags for errors in papers. Is there a way to better equip peer-reviewers for spotting errors and suspicious data? More details and links... We answer an audio question from Kim Mitchell (https://twitter.com/academicswrite). Submit your audio questions via our website (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) Nick Brown's blogpost (http://steamtraen.blogspot.com/2020/04/some-issues-in-recent-gaming-research.html) on the video game "study" We ran a live survey using Prolific! Go to prolific.com/everythinghertz to get $50 worth of credit for $1 Spotting unlikely data in meta-analysis How can make reviewers better at detecting errors in papers? Using a "Red team (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_team)" to pull apart your papers What do lay people think really happens in peer review? Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Buy our merch from our online store (https://teespring.com/stores/everything-hertz-podcast)! We've got hats, mugs, hoodies, shirts + more https://vangogh.teespring.com/v3/image/MMTLZXJvOr6yzbqO5k5mdkmfFhY/480/560.jpg Cite this episode Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, June 15) "110: Red flags for errors in papers", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VTYNG

Dan and James recorded a live episode on open publishing as part of the Open Publishing Fest. They also ran a survey (from start to finish) during the course of the episode on the public's perception of open scientific publishing and discuss the results. Here are more stuff they covered, plus links! The Open Publishing Fest (https://openpublishingfest.org/) We collected data LIVE thanks to Prolific! Go to prolific.co/everythinghertz to get $50 worth of credit for just $1 How to build a low cost book scanner (https://goinggnu.wordpress.com/2020/04/20/making-of-kaniyam-scanbox-diy-scanner/) A prepreprint repository (https://info.africarxiv.org/) for African researchers What is the role of "niche" preprint servers vs. general preprint servers? Is there a discoverability crisis? Detailed literature search is HARD The Octopus publishing platform (https://app.science-octopus.org/) We discuss the results of our real-time survey on the public's perception of open publishing Some university have set up a 'data office', to which data requests are sent to (instead of the author). Is this a good idea? Are people really doing that many coronavirus studies? Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) We have a Merch store too (https://teespring.com/en-GB/stores/everything-hertz-podcast), where you can pick up some Hertz gear. Cite this episode Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, June 1) "109: Open scientific publishing [live episode]", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/AT2XH

We discuss the recent claim that screen time is more harmful than heroin and whether psychological science is a crisis-ready discipline Other stuff we cover: Dan's adjustment to a second kid The "Psychological science is not yet a crisis ready discipline (https://psyarxiv.com/whds4/)" preprint The Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/rickcarlsson/status/1260661034580242432?s=21) from Rickard Carlsson There is a contimuum of evidence for psychological science's use in a crisis Belgian Officials: To Save Country's Potato Industry, Belgians Must Eat More Fries (https://time.com/5829078/belgium-coronavirus-potatoes-frites/) Our episode with Amy Orben Screen time has apparenty worse effects than heroin use on wellbeing (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0839-4?draft=collection) Are we better off without press releases? Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, May 18) "108: Requiem for a screen", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/BCKMS

We chat with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti (Chapman University, USA) about the role of memes and emerging social media in communicating science and statistics. Stuff we cover + links: Why Chelsea uses memes and social media for science communication Chelsea's use of TikTok Chelsea's TikTok profile (https://tiktok.com/@chelseaparlettpelleriti) Chelsea's Instagram profile (https://instagram.com/chelseaparlett/) How much time should you spend on science communication vs. science research? What Twitch is and how this can be used by academics Chelsea's Twitch profile (https://twitch.tv/cmparlettpelleriti) Dan's livestream of him writing a paper (https://youtu.be/mZkLlT0Jz7M) Chelsea's profile on YouTube (https://youtube.com/channel/UCp2HgyofhnTJ-uxdhGNEHCg) Custom Stats themed Quiplash Game Codes: (JNL-HWDN) (DJM-ZDES) Is Instagram worth it for Science communication? NeuralNetMemes: https://instagram.com/neuralnetmemes/?hl=en Have statistical software packages become too easy? Chelsea's statisical consultancy service (https://cmparlettpelleriti.github.io/TheChatistician.html) brms package in R (bayesian regression): https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/brms/index.html The JASP stats package (https://jasp-stats.org) The Phantom Tollbooth book (https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/89124/the-phantom-tollbooth-by-norton-juster-illustrated-by-jules-feiffer/) The lady tasting tea book (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_Tasting_Tea) Other links - Chelsea on twitter (https://twitter.com/ChelseaParlett) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, May 4) "107: Memes, TikTok, and science communication (with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], Retrieved from https://osf.io/8dywb/ Special Guest: Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti.

Dan and James discuss whether getting rapid outcomes to address the pandemic is worth the increased risk of mistakes—how can researchers perform research that is both urgent and accurate? Here's other stuff they discuss... Whiskey as a hobby James' pandemic tips How publication practices have changed during the pandemic The news article (https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/sarscov2-virus-able-to-survive-in-60c-temperatures/news-story/20421e370f8e10f675ee296e92928de2) that stated bioRxiv papers are peer-reviewed Peer review during a pandemic The impact of the corona virus on employment in academia Bad peer-reviewed studies do more damage than bad preprints Preprints that require permission for citation Is there a need for the rapid dissemination of psych research, at the risk of making errors? Hertz merchandise (https://teespring.com/en-GB/stores/everything-hertz-podcast) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, April 20) "106: Science on the Run)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], Retrieved from https://osf.io/7ydvz/

We chat with Marike Schiffer, who is a Senior Editor at Nature Human Behavior, about her journal's push to increase reproducibility in the behavioral sciences. She also shares how her team evaluates manuscripts and some common misunderstandings about scientific publishing. Here's what else we cover: * Marike's experiencing making the switch from researcher to full-time editorial work * The day-to-day tasks of an editor * The Manifesto for reproducible science (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0021) * Why has Nature Human Behavior made such a big push towards reproducibility * The benefits of transparent peer review comments * The importance of posting rich datasets * Transparency in how journals deal with manuscripts * The Editorial describing how Nature Human Behavior deals with manuscripts (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0778-0) * The future of scientific publishing * Audio versions of papers * Two common misunderstanding that scientists have about scientific publishing * Dan's synthetic data paper (https://elifesciences.org/articles/53275) Other links - Marike on twitter (https://twitter.com/marike_cogneuro) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, April 6) "105: Tell it like it is (with Marike Schiffer)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U9QRN, Retrieved from https://osf.io/u9qrn/ Special Guest: Marike Schiffer.

Dan and James discuss the COVID-19 pandemic and how it's impacting academia Other things they discuss: Roy and HG's gymnastics commentary (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WxaTXqf85Y) from the Sydney 2000 olympics News tickers and collective anxiety How will cancelled talks and events influence our careers? Use the promo code "everythinghertz" to get $50 in free Prolific credit that you can use to recruit online participants for your next study, more details here (https://www.prolific.co/everythinghertz) Using ‘Second Life’ for conferences Tools for working from home "It’s just a cough" skit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vNJ5Krj7SQ) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, March 2) "Now we'll discover which meetings could've been emails", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DHGR6, Retrieved from https://osf.io/dhgr6/

Dan and James discuss rejection in academia and emerging science communication mediums. Here are a few links and other things they cover: The main university of Sydney bar has closed (https://honisoit.com/2020/02/usu-shutters-manning-bar/) because all the youth are playing Fortnite and on TikTok How should you respond to rejection? The rejected paper (https://twitter.com/salarrad/status/1231610843059642368?s=20) on fasting during Ramadan and cognitive control What if there was Tinder for manuscript submission? Josh’s tweet (https://twitter.com/joshmnicholson/status/1232696333829595136?s=20) about citations in Wikipedia Grant lotteries The Steven Bradbury reference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAADWfJO2qM) The use of TikTok for science communication Dan and James argues about whether blogs or twitter threads are better Disney princesses The Corona virus and preprints Using instagram for scicomm Should twitter remove the ‘likes’ and follower counts? Billie Eilish sampling (https://twitter.com/timduggan/status/1221658406122975234?s=20) the sound traffic lights make in Sydney The Boston train pigeon (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1233162498121043969?s=20) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, March 2) "Swiping right", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/5XR2F, Retrieved from https://osf.io/5xr2f/

Should research scientists build their knowledge and skillset broadly at the risk of being a master of none? Dan and James discuss this, along with a recent editorial on the use of Twitter in academia. Here's other stuff they cover: * Some tools that Dan's using right now: BioRender (https://biorender.com/), Canva (https://www.canva.com/), Slack (https://slack.com/), 99designs (https://99designs.com/), and Notion (https://www.notion.so/). * Dan pre-registers a prediction * Herchandise! Use the code "EH102" to get a 20% discount on Hertz merchandise (https://teespring.com/stores/everything-hertz-podcast) (valid until March 2, 2020) * The k-index editorial (https://casereports.onlinejacc.org/content/early/2020/01/31/j.jaccas.2020.01.003) * Roger Ebert's statue (https://time.com/76577/roger-ebert-statue-illinois/) * James wanted a picture of this fish in the show notes, for some reason https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Napoleon_Fish_by_Gustavo_Gerdel.jpg Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, February 17) "Master of none", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3A9TN, Retrieved from https://osf.io/3a9tn/

Dan and James cover a new paper which discusses whether research misconduct should be criminalised. If so, where do we draw the line and who should investigate these cases? Here's an episode overview and links to stuff we mentioned: We’re a pop science podcast, apparently Elizabeth Bik’s wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Bik) Elizabeth’s Patreon page (https://www.patreon.com/elisabethbik) The original consortium letter (https://presspage-production-content.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/1508/coalitionletteropposinglowerembargoes-864869.pdf?54750) The apology letter (https://www.psychologicalscience.org/policy/to-aps-members-from-the-board-of-directors.html) from the APS The “love of science (https://twitter.com/NobelPrize/status/1219530825320083456?s=20)” tweet How James got into science Tal’s “science is not a jobs program (https://twitter.com/talyarkoni/status/960296870080925696?s=20)” tweet The 'Should research misconduct be criminalised? (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1747016119898400)' article Professor charged with spending $96k in grant money in strip clubs (https://nypost.com/2020/01/15/ex-drexel-professor-arrested-for-spending-96k-in-grant-money-on-strip-clubs/) Professor with huge taxi bill (https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/21LV4B/topp-professor-tok-taxi-for-en-halv-mill-paa-det-offentliges-regning) (story is Norwegian, but Google translate does a decent job). The professor has agreed to pay back all trips between home and the office (about $11,000 USD Data From A Top Geneticist’s Lab Was Flagged To A Major UK University. It Didn’t Launch A Formal Investigation Until A Decade Later. (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/a-uk-university-knew-of-problems-in-a-top-geneticists-lab) The inaugural “get in the sea” nomination goes to the Editorial office described in this tweet (https://twitter.com/lipangalala/status/1222194449134039040?s=20) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Get 10% off Everything Hertz merch, like mugs, stickers, shirts, and hoodies, by using the discount code "HERTZ101" at our online store (https://teespring.com/stores/everything-hertz-podcast). Discount code valid until February 17, 2020. Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, February 3) "Punishing research misconduct", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/Q86AK, Retrieved from https://osf.io/q86ak/

To celebrate our 100th episode, which we video-streamed live, Dan and James were joined by three special guests: Daniel Lakens, Amy Orben, and Chris Chambers. Here's what they covered in this episode: James and Dan share their favourite episodes The power of the Twitter direct message Daniel Lakens joins us to discuss his recent work on helping people make better statistical decisions Can you create cross-discipline effect size guidelines? What would Jacob Cohen say if we could bring him back to life? Academic backup career plans Our new partnership with Prolific James' piece on not treating your research participants like cattle (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/stop-treating-your-experimental-participants-like-cattle-b5fab7fbfca7) Amy Orben joins us to discuss multiverse analysis and the Reproducibilitea community The Latin Modern Roman font (https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/latin-modern-roman) We speak with Chris Chambers and get an update of what's happening with Registered reports Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) This episode was brought you by Prolific (https://www.prolific.co/everythinghertz), who is giving away $50 to podcast listeners who want to give online sampling a go! Redeem the free credit here: https://www.prolific.co/everythinghertz Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Special Guests: Amy Orben, Chris Chambers, and Daniel Lakens.

Dan and James answer a listener question on science advocacy. Is this an activity that all scientists should do, and if so, how much advocacy work should we be doing? Here's other stuff they cover and links to stuff they mention: James’ thoughts on thanksgiving James’s hot mic tweet (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1199676892460261376?s=20) The Tom Bartlett story in the Chronicle (https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/20190924-Criminology) about the criminologist accused of cooking the books The SCORE DAPRA project (https://www.darpa.mil/program/systematizing-confidence-in-open-research-and-evidence) A listener question from Crystal Steltenpohl (https://twitter.com/CNSteltenpohl): What is a scientist’s role in advocacy? Julieanne Smolinski piece (https://medium.com/@boobsradley/between-my-hectic-job-and-nourishing-social-life-it-s-not-always-easy-to-find-the-time-to-make-aa9c48a5458b) on Hollywood diets Sunbathe your arsehole (https://jezebel.com/sunbathe-your-asshole-for-wellness-1840031856), for wellness Dealing with bad science on Facebook Feedback from an older episode on statistical errors in sports science Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, January 6) "Science advocacy", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/8R5ZD, Retrieved from https://osf.io/8r5zd/

We chat with Sophia Crüwell (Meta-Research Innovation Center Berlin) about pre-registration and her recent work introducing pre-registration templates for cognitive modelling research. Here's what we cover and some links: * Sophia’s PhD research * Sophia’s recent preprint: Preregistration in Complex Contexts: A Preregistration Template for the Application of Cognitive Models (https://psyarxiv.com/2hykx) * The first version of the pre-print (https://osf.io/download/5dbb4af2af84c3000eea7685/?version=1&displayName=Preregistration%20is%20redundant,%20at%20best-2019-10-31T20%3A58%3A26.782Z.pdf) titled, preregistration is redundant, at best * The updated version (https://psyarxiv.com/x36pz/) of the preprint titled, "Is preregistration worthwhile?" * The Bayesian Spectacles blogpost (https://www.bayesianspectacles.org/a-breakdown-of-preregistration-is-redundant-at-best/) on the first version of the pre-print * Data simulation (https://debruine.github.io/lmem_sim/index.html) from former guest Lisa DeBruine * The latest with reproducibilitea (https://reproducibilitea.org/) * The cargo cult science talk (http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm) Other links - Sophia on twitter (https://twitter.com/cruwelli) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, December 16) "Episode titles are redundant, at best (with Sophia Crüwell)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/R942W, Retrieved from https://osf.io/r942w/ Special Guest: Sophia Crüwell.

Dan and James discuss the concept of "slow science", which has been proposed in order to improve the quality of scientific research and create a more sustainable work environment. Here's what they cover in this episode Thank you patrons day! Social media algorithms reward outrage, not quality of substance A paper on slow science (https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(19)30242-6) from Uta Frith, which includes a proposal of publication limits Is information overload really a problem? The META platform (https://www.meta.org/) for a weekly research digest Would reducing the volume of publications really improve quality? The working paper (https://osf.io/z47w3/) that simulated the quality vs. quantity question The slow professor book https://utorontopress.com/ca/the-slow-professor-3 Michael Frank’s paper on N-best evaluation (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364661319302347) Some institutions are now screening papers before submission to check for errors Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, December 2) "Slow Science", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/XEU42, Retrieved from https://osf.io/xeu42/

Dan and James discuss the results of this year's Nature survey of PhD students. Despite a majority of students reporting general satisfaction with their decision to undertake a PhD, many described a sense of uncertainty, harassment in the lab, and gruelling work hours. Things they discuss... James met an Australian member of parliament (https://twitter.com/deborahapthorp/status/1192343606985555968?s=20) and won a commendation (https://twitter.com/senseaboutsci/status/1195284321617293313?s=20) from Sense under Science The Doing Good symposium (https://www.cbs.mpg.de/doing-good) The Nature PhD survey (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03459-7) Bloat in academia What people like the most about being a PhD student Are we just not hearing that much from people who are having a good time? Financial pressure in PhDs Harassment and discrimination in PhD programs Alternative academic careers James' cat whisker collection South Korean kids turn one when they’re born (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/02/south-korea-mulls-ending-arcane-age-system-to-match-rest-of-world) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, November 18) "The chaotic state of doctoral research", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CDZRA, Retrieved from https://osf.io/cdzra/

Dan and James discuss why academia tolerates bad presentations and the strange distrust of polished presentations. Here's what else they discuss... James had a Filipino feast https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1188582859528949766?s=20 We’re approaching 100 episodes! ReproducibiliTea (https://osf.io/3qrj6/wiki/home/) is spreading worldwide! Why do some people not trust polished presentations? The Mike Morrison episode (https://everythinghertz.com/87) on the Better Poster The “I want a refund for a bad presentation” blog post (https://www.jratcliffe.net/post/i-want-a-refund-for-your-conference-presentation) What does James consider a ‘good’ presentation? Conference apps Why don’t we teach PhD students to do things that they’ll need further in their careers, like making presentations and writing emails? Vague emails James wants to help out an email spammer Email vs. Twitter DM Anonymous people on the internet James discovers coin collecting Blocking people on Twitter Dan’s got a show recommendation: Money Heist / Paper house (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6468322/) Why do we hate spoilers? Spoiling the end of a movie on Pompeii Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link

Dan and James chat with Fiona Fidler (University of Melbourne), who is leading the repliCATS project (https://replicats.research.unimelb.edu.au/), which aims to develop accurate techniques to elicit estimates of the replicability of research. This is also the first time they interview a guest live! Here's what they discuss... * The story behind repliCATS * Australia's best export, Tim Tams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Tam) * The SCORE project (https://www.wired.com/story/darpa-wants-to-solve-sciences-replication-crisis-with-robots/) organised by DARPA * Can anyone use the repliCATS methodology? * Dan, Fiona, and James talk about did their honours theses (this is roughly the Australian equivalent of a Masters) * What would a successful repliCATS project look like? * What sort of heuristics do people use to assess replicability? * The AIMOS conference (https://www.aimos2019conference.com/) * The role of replicability in public policy * This is Bob Katter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i739SyCu9I) * Should we be keeping the replication crisis behind closed doors? Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, October 21) "Predicting the replicability of research ", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/KZPYG, Retrieved from https://osf.io/kzpyg/ Special Guest: Fiona Fidler.

Dan and James answer a listener question on how to navigate open science practices, such as preprints and open code repositories, in light of double-blind reviews. Stuff they cover: How common is double-blind review? How many journals don’t accept preprints? Bias in the review process How practical is blinded review? Do the benefits of preprints outweighs not having blinded review? James' approach to getting comments on his preprints Convincing your supervisor to adopt open science practices The preprint that James won’t submit for publication, for some reason We get reviews... Our first live guest! Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, October 7) "Double-blind peer review vs. Open Science", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7ZPME (https://osf.io/7zpme/)

Dan and James discuss the role of Google Scholar in citation patterns and whether we should limit academics to only publishing two papers a year. Links and details: James has a new Hertz-quarters The Metascience conference (https://www.metascience2019.org) How is google scholar influencing citation patterns A slide from @Jevinwest's presentation (https://twitter.com/gmusser/status/1170466414345375746?s=20) on Google Scholars Is this a symptom of lazy citaton practices rather than the algorithm? What are the alternatives to google scholar? Should google open up the algorithm? GS will find your preprint and link it to the paywall link Why is Google Scholar free? What would make GS better? Using the Zotero plugin for to collected citation info in bulk from search results in GS Top recommended articles in GS are phenomenal GS is not great for meta-analysis GS reduces friction Should we limit academics to only publishing two papers a year (https://twitter.com/joseph_fridman/status/1170447576505520128?s=20), as suggested by former guest, Dorothy Bishop? Who would stand to lose from this? Is this idea practical? What if only a few countries or institutions implemented this? The Japanese math genius who posts papers on his own website (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/math-mystery-shinichi-mochizuki-and-the-impenetrable-proof/) Chaos in the brickyard paper (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/142/3590/339.1) Chaos in the brickyard cartoon (https://massivesci.com/articles/chaos-in-the-brickyard-comic-matteo-farinella/) Open data isn’t a new concept Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, September 16) "Chaos in the brickyard", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast] https://osf.io/xfd2p/

We chat with Kristin Sainani (Stanford University) about a popular statistical method in sports medicine research (magnitude based inference), which has been banned by some journals, but continues to thrive in some pockets of scholarship. We also discuss the role of statistical inference in the current replication crisis. Links and info * What is magnitude based inference and how did Kristin get involved in this? * The response to Kristin’s critiques * This is really an issue of small sample sizes * Kristin’s Coursera course (https://coursera.org/learn/sciwrite) on scientific writing * The readability of scientific articles is decreasing (https://elifesciences.org/articles/27725) * The role of statistical inference in the replication crisis * Kristin has changed her mind about… Twitter * Dan made international news by posting a picture of a bird on Twitter (https://twitter.com/dsquintana/status/1163083819605475328) * Kristin recommends this paper: P values are just the tip of the iceberg (https://www.nature.com/news/statistics-p-values-are-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-1.17412) as well as the following books: Radium Girls (https://www.amazon.com/Radium-Girls-Story-Americas-Shining/dp/149264935X) and Bad Blood (https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Blood-Secrets-Silicon-Startup/dp/152473165X) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, September 2) "Shifting the goalposts in statistics (with Kristin Sainani)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], Retrieved from https://osf.io/3q25f/ Special Guest: Kristin Sainani.

Dan and James discuss two listener questions on performing secondary data analysis and the potential for prestige to creep into open science reforms. More info and links: Why generate your own dataset when you can get a high impact paper using public data? Thanks to Stu Murray (https://twitter.com/DrStuartBMurray) for the question Will people steal your ideas? The journal Scientific Data (https://www.nature.com/sdata/) Are we now incentivising data mining rather than data collecting? Synthetic data Dan’s recent synthetic data preprint primer (https://psyarxiv.com/dmfb3/) Ego and prestige got us into the mess we’re trying to fix with open science, but how can we stop this from happening again? Thanks to Robin Kok (https://twitter.com/robinnkok) for the question, listen to our episode with him on e-health (https://everythinghertz.com/34)! Did all the people who co-authored the paper to change statistical significance the default p-value threshold to .005 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0189-z) actually do this in subsequent papers? Vagus nerve brain washing paper (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2019/08/13/733410.full.pdf) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, August 19) "Mo data mo problems", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/TQ75J (https://osf.io/tq75j/)

We chat with Tom about whether psychology has a conflict-of-interest problem and how to best define such conflicts. Links and other stuff we cover... Tom's article (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02041-5) on conflicts of interest in psychology How can we define a conflict an interest without falling down a rabbit hole? Communication statistics to the layperson How science journalism focuses on single studies rather than the larger story Tom’s new book: The AI does not hate you (https://www.amazon.com/Does-Not-Hate-You-Superintelligence-ebook/dp/B07K258VCV) Win Tom’s book! Tweet your favourite Hertz episode and we’ll pick one at random, who'll get sent Tom's book How do journalists go about hearing from new voices for story comments? What has Tom changes his mind about? Tom’s book recommendation: Galileo's Middle Finger (https://www.amazon.com/Galileos-Middle-Finger-Heretics-Activists/dp/0143108115) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, August 5) "Conflicts of interest in psychology (with Tom Chivers)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F9WBM (https://osf.io/f9wbm/) Special Guest: Tom Chivers.

Dan and James apply the pomodoro principle by tackling four topics within a strict ten-minute time limit each: James' new error detection tool, academic dress codes, the "back in my day..." defence for QRPs, and p-slacking. Here are links and details... * James won an award * James’ new error detection tool, DEBIT (https://osf.io/pm825/) * Academic dress codes * P-slacking * The p-slacking paper (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3408200) * Marcus Crede’s paper: A Negative Effect of a Contractive Pose Is Not Evidence for the Positive Effect of an Expansive Pose (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3198470) * A preview of our next episode on conflicts of interest in psychology Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, July 15) "The pomodoro episode", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VTDQ8 (https://osf.io/vtdq8/)

We chat with Mike Morrison, a former User Experience (UX) designer who quit his tech career to research how we can bring UX design principles to science. We discuss Mike's recently introduced 'better poster' format and why scientists should think carefully about UX. Here's what we cover: What’s the story behind the “better poster?” The Better Poster video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RwJbhkCA58) The Better Poster template (https://osf.io/ef53g/) The importance of minimising cognitive load Science isn’t badly designed, it’s not even designed at all What is good User Experience (UX)? The most important feature of SciHub Version 2 of the ‘better poster’ Weird poster designs that James has seen over the years The Fish Market study (https://peerj.com/articles/7138/) Common misunderstandings of the better poster Empirically investigating the performance of the Better Poster The meta-meta poster How better posters get better questions Mike’s next target: Better Presentations Andrew York’s Github paper (https://andrewgyork.github.io/remote_refocus/) A special give-away! Other links - Mike on twitter (https://twitter.com/mikemorrison) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, July 1) "Improving the scientific poster (with Mike Morrison)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/BNP7E (https://osf.io/bnp7e/) Special Guest: Mike Morrison.

Dan and James answer a listener question on whether they should stick it out for a few months in a toxic lab to get one more paper or if they should leave. Other stuff they cover: * We don’t like cricket, oh no, we love it (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cewfIUQ6q8o) * James is bad at tribalism * We answer a listener question about a bad lab environment * The “Dutch Bounce” * The Golden Lab Child * Demonstrating independence by writing a sole author paper * What should you do if there’s a late authorship switch on your paper? * Having an upfront conversation about authorship * James on NPR (https://www.npr.org/2019/02/17/695536889/volunteers-fight-bad-science?t=1560712522537) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, June 17) "Should I stay or should I go?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RX7FB (https://osf.io/rx7fb/)

We chat with Kevin Mitchell (Trinity College Dublin) about what the field of psychology can learn from genetics research, how our research theories tend to be constrained by our research tools, and his new book, "Innate (https://press.princeton.edu/titles/13255.html)". Other stuff we cover: * Kevin's book, "Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are (https://press.princeton.edu/titles/13255.html)" * The story with link between Serotonin transporter gene 5-HTTLPR variation and it’s link to depression * Gene wide association studies (GWAS) vs. candidate gene studies * Correcting for multiple tests in GWAS * What can psychology learn from genetics when it comes to improving methods? * When did people lose faith in candidate gene studies? * Common vs. rare gene mutations * How our theories are shaped by our technology and resources * The third overlooked area of genetic variation (other than nature and nurture): How the developmental program plays out * Why intelligence is just an index of how well your brain is put together * What happened to identifying new therapeutic targets via genetics? * What Kevin has changed his mind about * A few papers on mice behavior relevant to what Kevin mentioned, Matias et al (https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/20552/elife-20552-v2.pdf) (2017), Menegas et al (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-018-0222-1) (2018), Zalocusky et al (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature17400) (2016), Miyazaki et al (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04496-y) (2018), Bercovici et al (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6325538/) (2018), Orsini et al (https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13415-018-00649-0) (2018) * Robustness and Evolvability in Living Systems (https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8002.html) (Wagner, A) * The Strategy of the Genes (https://www.amazon.com/Strategy-Genes-C-H-Waddington/dp/1138017310) (Waddington, C) * Cybernetics : Or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (https://www.amazon.com/Cybernetics-Second-Control-Communication-Machine/dp/026273009X) (Wiener, N) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, June 3) "GWAS big teeth you have, grandmother (with Kevin Mitchell)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RS4HX (https://osf.io/rs4hx/) Special Guest: Kevin Mitchell.

We chat with Amy Orben, who applies "multiverse" methodology to combat and expose analytical flexibility in her research area of the impact of digital technologies on psychological wellbeing. We also discuss ReproducibiliTea, an early career researcher-led journal club initiative she co-founded, which helps young researchers create local open science groups. Here are some more details and links: * The tweet (https://twitter.com/_vdeni_/status/1126485212337143808) pointing our Dan's gramatical error in his usual introduction. THANKS DENIS * Is Twitter melting our brains? * The history of "new technology" panic * What's the next panic? * Moral entrepreneurs: profiting from moral panic * Specification curve analysis (https://socialsciences.nature.com/users/200472-amy-orben/posts/42763-beyond-cherry-picking): a way to run all theoretically defensible analysis options on a given dataset * Amy's Nature Human Behavior paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0506-1) * Amy's PNAS paper (https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/04/30/1902058116) * The longitudincal effect of social media use on life satisfaction * How should scientists speak out against dodgy science? * The story behind Reproducabilitea * The ReproducibiliTea podcast (https://soundcloud.com/reproducibilitea) * ReproducibiliTea stickers (https://twitter.com/OrbenAmy/status/1125712657334571008)! * The UK Reproducibility network (https://www.bristol.ac.uk/psychology/research/ukrn/about/) * Daniel Lakens' Coursera course (https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences) * A multiverse of multiverses (https://osf.io/9qke2/) * Press releasing every paper might not be the best idea * Amy's book recommendation: The long way to a small angry planet (https://www.amazon.com/Long-Small-Angry-Planet-Wayfarers/dp/0062444131 https://www.amazon.com/Long-Small-Angry-Planet-Wayfarers/dp/0062444131) Other links - Amy on Twitter (https://twitter.com/OrbenAmy) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, May 21) "A GPS in the Garden of Forking Paths (with Amy Orben)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/38KPE (https://osf.io/38kpe/) Special Guest: Amy Orben.

By popular demand, Dan and James are kicking it old school and just shooting the breeze. They cover whether scientists should be on Twitter, if Fortnite is ruining our youth, book recommendations, and null oxytocin studies. Stuff they cover and links to obsure references * Should scientists be on twitter? * James runs a Twitter experiment * Scite has now gone live, listen to our episode (https://everythinghertz.com/80) on this platform * Our dreams of a live Hertz episode * Is Fortnite (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortnite) killing our youth and the parallels with the “heavy metal” scare * Amy Orben’s screen time study (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0506-1) * Multiverse analysis * Book recommendations: Kevin Mitchell’s "Innate" (https://www.amazon.com/Innate-How-Wiring-Brains-Shapes/dp/0691173885), Gareth Leng's "Heart of the brain" (https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/heart-brain) * Daryl dug a hole reference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDl1i3mpKwM), from the Aussie classic, "The Castle" * A new null oxytocin paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453019300800) and the twitter response, and Dan's response (https://twitter.com/dsquintana/status/1122962998069485573?s=20) * The SANS meeting venue (https://twitter.com/dsquintana/status/1124386664758095877?s=20) * QR codes on posters * The slides to Dan’s oxytocin talk (https://osf.io/q7a4w/) at SANS * The Hertz Hype Cycle * Dan recollects one of the first conversations he had with James Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, May 8) "Back to our dirty unwashed roots", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/N9BGX (https://osf.io/n9bgx/)

We answer a listener question on the possible negative consequences of the open science movement—are things moving too quickly? Links and things we discuss in the episode: * We have a new logo, if you haven't already noticed... * Contact us via our website form (https://everythinghertz.com/contact)! * Considering the potential downsides of open science * Here come dat boi meme explination (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/dat-boi) * The dangers of open access by fiat * The role of commercial entities in open science * The “University of Oslo fancy Norway people-pay-taxes oil money bloody library (https://www.ub.uio.no/english/)” * Dropping the success rate of grants to increase the quality of evaluation * Reframing open science reform efforts to a mission of equity and fairness * We don’t know the process behind university sexual harassment/misconduct investigations * Does transparency even matter if people won’t follow up on problems? * James' prediction: If someone starts a journal that ONLY does Registered Report, this will be very successful * The milkshake duck tweet (https://twitter.com/pixelatedboat/status/741904787361300481) and an explanation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milkshake_Duck) * Paul Roos and his “no dickheads” policy (https://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/2011-12-16/the-swan-way) * Linking DOIs * We can't let edge case scenarios, which may not even play out, hobble progress Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, April 15) "More janitors and fewer architects" Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7ZR9J (https://osf.io/7zr9j/)

We answer our first audio question, on whether academia is too broken to fix, and a second question on whether we’ve ever worried about the possible repercussions of our public critiques and commentary on academia. Show details: Our first audio question is from Erin Williams (@DrErinWill), who asks whether academia is too broken to fix The letter to the editor that got rejected, despite the publication of the response to the letter Harassment in academia Have we ever been worried that someone might say, "I'd never hire those dudes" because of what we say? Other stuff that has happened to us as a result of the podcast Fahrenheit vs. Celsius Supply and demand for academic jobs The criticism that comes with putting yourself out there Links - @ReproRocks (https://twitter.com/ReproRocks): for those working in reproduction to share their work through twitter - The Steven Pinker book - The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010) - Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/drderringer/status/1110593951105540096?s=20) from @drderringer - Me too Stem blog (https://metoostem.com/) - Gideon on Twitter: @GidMK (https://twitter.com/GidMK) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, April 1) "Too Young To Know, Too Old To Care" Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/W6MER (https://osf.io/345dk/)

We chat with Sean Rife, who the co-founder of scite.ai (https://scite.ai), a start-up that combines natural language processing with a network of experts to evaluate the veracity of scientific work. Here's what we cover and links for a few things we mention * What is scite.ai? * The Winnower (https://thewinnower.com) * Why is there no good (and free) plagiarism detector? * Grobid (https://grobid.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Introduction/) - A machine learning library for extracting, parsing and re-structuring PDFs * Meta-analysis can prop up flawed bodies of literature * The "Too meta (https://xkcd.com/1447/)" XKCD cartoon * What’s the end game for scite? * The 80,000 hours game (https://80000hours.org/articles/can-you-guess/) * Spooner (http://spooner.lyceum.ws), a utility that allows authors of scientific publications to make their work available to the general public (probably) without violating publishing agreements Other links - Sean on twitter (www.twitter.com/seanrife) - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, March 18) "Cites are not endorsements", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/Q9EYG (https://osf.io/q9eyg/) Special Guest: Sean Rife.

We chat with Henry Drysdale (University of Oxford), co-founder of the COMPare trials project (http://compare-trials.org), which compared clinical trial registrations with reported outcomes in five top medical journals and qualitatively analysed the responses to critical correspondence. Discussion points and links galore: The history behind the COMPare project The two papers that were published: a prospective cohort study (https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-019-3173-2) correcting and monitoring 58 misreported trials and a qualitative analysis (https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-019-3172-3) of researchers’ responses to critical correspondence Ben Goldacre's books (https://www.amazon.co.uk/l/B002C1VRBQ?_encoding=UTF8&redirectedFromKindleDbs=true&rfkd=1&shoppingPortalEnabled=true) What is outcome switching? What were some of the responses to query letters from the authors and journals? Misreporting trials (usually) doesn't lead to patient harm, but it harms the evidence base Where should the buck stop with outcome switching? Would Registered Reports solve this problem? The CONSORT guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org) Have the journals changed their practices? COMPare on twitter (https://twitter.com/compare_trials) The COMPare website (http://compare-trials.org) Here is Henry on Twitter - @HenryMDrysdale (https://twitter.com/HenryMDrysdale) Here is Ben Goldacre on Twitter - @bengoldacre (https://twitter.com/bengoldacre) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, March 4) "Clinical trial reporting (with Henry Drysdale)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/HBX8R (https://osf.io/hbx8r/) Special Guest: Henry Drysdale.

In this episde, we chat with Lisa DeBruine (University of Glasgow) about her experience with large-scale collaborative science and how her psychology department made the switch from SPSS to R. Discussion points and links galore: Deborah Apthorp's tweet on having to teach SPSS (https://twitter.com/deborahapthorp/status/1092599860212068352), "because that's what students know" People who are involved with teaching R for psychology at the University of Glasgow: @Eavanmac @dalejbarr @McAleerP @clelandwoods @PatersonHelena @emilynordmann Why the #psyTeachR started teaching R for reproducible science Data wrangling vs. statistical analysis The psyTeachR website (https://psyteachr.github.io) Danielle Navarro (https://djnavarro.net), and her R text book (https://learningstatisticswithr.com) that you should read Lisa's "faux" package (https://github.com/debruine/faux) for data simulation Sometimes you can't share data, simulations are a good way around this problem "synthpop" is the name of the package (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/synthpop/vignettes/synthpop.pdf) that Dan mentioned that can simulate census data Power analysis can be hard once you go beyond the more conventional statistical tests (e.g., t-tests, ANOVAs etc...) Lisa's OSF page (https://osf.io/4i578/) Dirty code is always better than no code (but the cleaner the better) Live coding is terrifying but a useful teaching tool. Here's Dan live coding how to build a website in R (https://twitter.com/dsquintana/status/1070392412445401088), typos and all Using a Slack group for help The psychological science accelerator (https://psysciacc.org) Chris Chartier (Psych Science Accelerator Director) on Twitter (https://twitter.com/CRChartier) A few of the other (hundreds) of folks involved with the Psych Science Accelerator Director: @PsySciAcc: @CRChartier @BenCJ @JkayFlake @hmoshontz Lisa's Registered Report project (https://osf.io/f7v3n/) on face rating The challenges associated with collaborating with 100+ labs Authorship order Author contributions: CRediT taxonomy (http://dev.biologists.org/content/author-contributions) The DARPA-funding project (https://www.wired.com/story/darpa-wants-to-solve-sciences-replication-crisis-with-robots/) on using AI to determine reproducibility Interacting Minds workshop (http://interactingminds.au.dk/events/single-events/artikel/2-day-workshop-open-science-and-reproducibility/) in Denmark in March on open science and reproducibility Lisa shares what Glasgow is like Lisa has changed her mind about the importance of research metrics (h-index, impact factors etc...) Lisa thinks you should read this paper (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2515245918770963) on equivalence testing, which includes two former guests, Daniel Lakens (https://everythinghertz.com/guests/daniel-lakens), Anne Scheel (https://everythinghertz.com/guests/anne-scheel), and friend of the show Peder Isager. Here's the latest episode (https://anchor.fm/psychsococlock/episodes/Making-and-breaking-habits---Psych-Soc-OClock---Episode-4-e3327v) from Psych Soc O'Clock Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the first tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, February 18) "Large-scale collaborative science (with Lisa DeBruine)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/JDT6F (https://osf.io/jdt6f/) Special Guest: Lisa DeBruine.

Dan and James discuss how to deal with the problem of scientists who start talking about topics outside their area of expertise. They also discuss what they would do differently if they would do their PhDs again Here's what they cover... The podcast will now be permanently archived on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/zj7y3/) James did a talk at the Sound Education conference on podcasting for early career researchers. Here's the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26t6660_f-A) if you want to see him squirm uncomfortably in his chair for 20 minutes and/or hear his thoughts our approach to podcasting The temptation for academics to believe their own press and to have their thoughts reinforced by the praise they get Keeping a handle on what you know and don't know Nassim Nicholas Taleb (https://twitter.com/nntaleb) has FANS The "Pete Evans" effect, James' solution, that we should eat Pete Evans (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/i-think-i-have-a-solution-i-m-going-to-eat-pete-evans-7e2da6f3967f), pesca-pescaterianism (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC-ZBJ-Kw2E), and the spectacularly bad advice that we should stare into the sun (https://www.sciencealert.com/please-don-t-stare-at-the-sun-even-if-pete-evans-says-it-s-good-for-you) You should follow gynecologist Jennifer Gunter on Twitter (https://twitter.com/DrJenGunter) How much money would you pay for 100,000 engaged twitter followers? Here's the tweet (https://twitter.com/ImHardcory/status/1090213113352372224) James was referring to Should researchers have something like a Hippocratic Oath (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath)? How would we police this? Researchers are not good at admitting they're wrong, do we need to approach retractions differently? Would a bounty system, in which journals offer rewards, for finding errors in their papers, work well? The "Loss of confidence (https://lossofconfidence.com)" project, and Rebecca Willen's CV (https://rmwillen.info/publications/) The "Nobel disease" (http://skepdic.com/nobeldisease.html) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, February 4) "Promiscuous expertise", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/VYCAH (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VYCAH)

Peer review is typically conducted behind closed doors. There's been a recent push to make open peer review standard, but what's often left out of these conversations are the potential downsides. To illustrate this, Dan and James discuss a recent instance of open peer review that led to considerable online debate. Here's what they cover... How should we navigate the open review of preprints? Gate keepers gonna gate keep, but is this better out in the open? Weaponising openness Some people don't realise that some data can’t be shared Should the reviewers of rejected papers follow them to the next journal? When bad papers that you reject pop up in another journal, unchanged Does the venue and timing of the open peer review matter? Signing your reviews Using publons to track your reviews Links - Brad Love’s blog post: http://bradlove.org/blog/open-review - Niko’s blog post: https://nikokriegeskorte.org/2019/01/09/whats-the-best-measure-of-representational-dissimilarity/ - Publons: https://publons.com - Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana - James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers - Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast - Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

We’re joined by Daniele Marinazzo (University of Ghent) to chat about the recently launched overlay journal Neurons, Behavior, Data analysis and Theory (NBDT), for which he on the Editorial Board. An overlay journal is organised a set of manuscripts that is published and hosted by a seperate entity (in this case, the Arxiv server), a feature that dramatically reduces publication costs. We discuss the unique overlay model, how this can drive article fees to essentially zero, and what it takes to build a good community journal. Here’s what we cover: Why launch a new neuroscience journal and how is it different from currently established journals? The unique way that editor’s decide which papers to send out for review How does the journal operate when it’s open access and submissions only cost $10? How do you build a journal that your target community will recognise as a ‘good’ journal? The process of submitting a manuscript to NBDT Should journals allow or encourage authors to suggest potential reviewers for their papers? Using Twitter to find reviewers based on who’s ‘liked’ the preprint Is posting a preprint on twitter actually useful? What can neuroscience learn from the field of physics? Authorship attribution How can a journal better champion early career researchers? Links... NBDT journal: https://nbdt.scholasticahq.com Danielle on twitter: https://twitter.com/dan_marinazzo Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Special Guest: Daniele Marinazzo.

In this episode, Dan and James chat with microbiologist Elisabeth Bik about about the detection of problematic images in scientific papers, the state of microbiome research, and making the jump from academia to industry. More info on what they cover: How Elisabeth get into error detection of scientific images The process of detecting errors in images How groups of authors tend to publish multiple papers with problematic images The association between journal prestige and problematic images Providing monetary incentives for publications Making the jump from academia to industry The current state of microbiome research Links - Patreon: www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast - Elisabeth on Twitter:  www.twitter.com/microbiomdigest - Elisabeth online: https://microbiomedigest.com - The problematic image paper: https://mbio.asm.org/content/7/3/e00809-16.short - Pubpeer: https://pubpeer.com - Dan on twitter: www.twitter.com/dsquintana - James on twitter: www.twitter.com/jamesheathers - Everything Hertz on twitter: www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast - Everything Hertz on Facebook: www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! - $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Special Guest: Elisabeth Bik.

Dan and James discuss what's missing from biobehavioral science course syllabi. Here's the episode lowdown: - A thank you to our new Patron supporters - The (supposed)CRISPR baby - SPSS vs. R: What should be used for instruction? - What would Dan and James include in a new syllabus? - Should students be taught scientific communication? - If we’re going to add new stuff to a syllabus, what gets removed? - Are courses too big these days? - Should students be taught how to set up a side hustle to apply their research skills outside of academia? Links - Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast - CRISPR baby story: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/11/30/18119589/crispr-technology-he-jiankui - Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana - James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers - Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast - Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! - $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Dan and James discuss a new journal of "controversial ideas" that will allow authors to publish articles anonymously. They also launch their Patreon page, in which listeners can support the show and get bonus features. Here's the episode lowdown - James describes his first experience eating a “ding dong” - Why James and Dan do the show - What is Patreon? - The Journal of Controversial Ideas - The link between a vaccine batch and narcolepsy in Norway - Can you “claim” our anonymous article a few years into the future? - What’s the difference between anonymous blogging and anonymous journal articles? - The new Neurons, Behavior, Data analysis and Theory journal Links - Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast - Narcolepsy paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389945713001548 - Journal of Controversial ideas story: https://www.bbc.com/news/education-46146766 - PsyBrief twitter account: twitter.com/psybrief - NBDT journal: nbdt.scholasticahq.com - Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana - James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers - Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast - Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! - $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + the warm feeling you're supporting the show - $5 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + bonus audio (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

In this episode, we chat about whether it’s necessary to move for an academic job to demonstrate “independence”. Here's a rundown of the other stuff we cover: - James' appearance at the “Sound education” conference - Dan’s first day of school as a latino in a white neighbourhood - Our thoughts on the restrictive social media policy at the SfN (Society for Neuroscience)conference - Why and how Dan and James moved overseas from Australia - Do you really need to move overseas to demonstrate independence? - The two-body problem - Can you demonstrate independence with sole-author papers? Links SFN social media policy https://twitter.com/fedeadolfi/status/1058760331747581953 Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Dan and James discuss the recent "grievance studies" hoax, whereby three people spent a year writing twenty-one fake manuscripts for submission to various cultural studies journals. They also discuss a new proposal to shift publication culture in which researchers pledge to publish exclusively in community-run journals but only when a pre-specified threshold of support for this commitment by the research community has been met. Here's an overview of the episode: - It’s fat bear week! - The new proposal to fix the stranglehold of commercial publishers in academia - Flipping journals to open access - The ‘grievance studies’ hoax - When James first came across the “dog rape” paper - What if you were to design the dog study properly? - Should we systematically try and hoax journals? - Astronomy already injects fake data, can we learn from this? - Should these new hoaxes all be associated with Sokal? Links - Brian Resnick’s fat bear week story: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/10/9/17955432/fat-bear-week-katmai-national-park-409-747-salmon - https://freeourknowledge.org - Paywall the movie: https://paywallthemovie.com - The ‘grievance studies’ hoax: https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ - James’ thread on the “dog-rape” study: https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1048313273563668486 - The proposal for systematic hoaxing: https://twitter.com/Meaningness/status/1047507838493499392 - A tweet from one of the reviewers of the dog paper: https://twitter.com/dwschieber/status/1047497301021798400 - Fake (a.k.a. blind) injection in astronomy: https://www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection - The original Sokal paper: http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/transgressv2/transgressv2_singlefile.html - Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana - James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers - Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast - Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

We’re joined by Brian Nosek (Centre for Open Science and University of Virginia) to chat about building technology to make open science easier to implement, and shifting the norms of science to make it more open. We also discuss his recent social sciences replication project in which researchers accurately predicted which studies would replicate. Here’s what we cover: - What is the Centre for Open Science? - How did Brian go from Psychology professor to the director of tech organisation? - How can researchers use the Open Science Framework (OSF)? - How does OSF remove friction for conducting open science? - Registered reports (now available at 131 journals!) - What factors converged to cause the emerging acceptance of open science? - The social sciences replication project - Can researchers anticipate which findings can replicate? - What happened when Brian and his team tried to submit their replication attempts of Science papers to Science? - The experience of reviewing registered reports Links: Centre for open science https://cos.io Open Science Framework https://osf.io Project Implicit https://www.projectimplicit.net/index.html The social sciences replication project paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0399-z Brian on Twitter https://www.twitter.com/briannosek Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Brian Nosek.

This episode includes part two of a chat with Nathan Hall (McGill University), who is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say. Before getting to the discussion, James and Dan answer two listener questions on grants and data cleaning. Here’s what is covered in the episode: People talk about papers all the time, but the grant process is not discussed openly—why? Speaking to your funding body’s relevant program officer Assembling a team that complements your weaknesses Data carpentry and the tidyverse Outlier analysis Nathan Hall on big publishing Upending the publication system by getting journals to bid for papers Using peer review quality to judge the quality of journals Debunking learning styes Academics chasing after celebrity and hype The cost of chasing academic prestige Using twitter hashtags like #PhDChat and #ECRchat to learn more about the experiences of other people Links Data carpentry https://datacarpentry.org/ The paper with detailed code https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03811-x The podcast conference https://www.soundeducation.fm/ Cern and comic sans https://www.theverge.com/2012/7/4/3136652/cern-scientists-comic-sans-higgs-boson Shit Academics Say on twitter https://www.twitter.com/AcademicsSay Nathan on Twitter https://www.twitter.com/prof_nch Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Nathan Hall.

We’re joined by Nathan Hall (McGill University) to chat about the role of humour in academia. Nathan is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ Twitter account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say. Here’s what we cover: How Nathan got started with the account The story behind Nathan's 'Research Wahlberg' Twitter account (@ResearchMark) The risk of social media usage being perceived as “unprofessional” The amount of free labor that academics are pressured to do How alcohol is becoming an unspoken coping strategy in academia Academic guilt and glamorising overwork Why Nathan changed his mind about making Imposter Syndrome jokes Leaving tweets in your draft folder Links Nein Quarterly https://twitter.com/NeinQuarterly Shit my Dad says https://twitter.com/shitmydadsays Cern and comic sans https://www.theverge.com/2012/7/4/3136652/cern-scientists-comic-sans-higgs-boson Ate the onion https://www.reddit.com/r/AteTheOnion/ Shit Academics Say on twitter https://www.twitter.com/AcademicsSay Nathan on Twitter https://www.twitter.com/prof_nch Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Nathan Hall.

Dan and James answer listener questions on tips for starting your PhD and the role of statistics in exploratory research. Other stuff they cover: James new paper on people that voluntarily give themselves goosebumps Dan’s new podcast: Physiology and Behavior A preview of next weeks guest, Nathan Hall When things are taken out of context on Twitter What do you do when people are angry with you on the internet? Tips for people starting a PhD Can inferential statistics play a role in exploratory research? Why don’t journals publish peer review reports? Why is PsycNet so bad? Links James’ paper https://peerj.com/articles/5292/ Physiology and Behavior podcast from Dan https://shows.pippa.io/dsquintana The tweet we discuss https://twitter.com/andpru/status/1024005699737509888?s=21 Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Dan and James chat with Jon Brock (Cognitive scientist at Frankl) about the use of blockchain technology for open science. Here's what they cover: What is the blockchain? Why Jon made the jump from academia to Frankl A cryptocurrency for open science What do institutional review boards think about using blockchain for data collection and storage? Autism heterogeneity How will this approach scale to biological signals and genetics data? What’s something that Jon’s changed him mind about in regards to academia? Links Frankl https://frankl.io Five reasons Frankl has a token https://medium.com/franklopenscience/why-does-frankl-need-a-frankl-token-4129d718ab74 Bjoern Brembs blog post http://bjoern.brembs.net/2018/05/after-24-years-when-will-academic-culture-finally-shift/ An explainer on cryptographic hashes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographichashfunction#Illustration Frankl in a nutshell https://medium.com/franklopenscience/frankl-in-a-nutshell-9b488c554dea Frankl for autism https://medium.com/franklopenscience/frankl-for-autism-e74f0108bf5a Rethinking Innateness https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/rethinking-innateness Jon on Twitter twitter.com/DrBrocktagon Dan on Twitter twitter.com/dsquintana James on Twitter twitter.com/jamesheathers Everything Hertz on Twitter twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Jon Brock.

Dan and James talk about the recent SIPS conference answer a listener question on "salami slicing" the outcomes from one study into multiple papers. Here's what they cover: What is the SIPS conference? [0:24] A SIPS proposal for Google scholar to highlight commentaries and replication attempts on specific articles [15:42] James and Dan’s favourite Hertz episodes [20:43] We answer a listener question on Salami slicing [28:45] Can you publish too much? [48:10] Links - SIPS conference: https://www.improvingpsych.org/SIPS2018/ - Reproducibilitea podcast: https://soundcloud.com/reproducibilitea - Salami slicing tweet: https://twitter.com/academicswrite/status/1008719899940786176 - Cumulative impact factors: http://khakhalin.blogspot.com/2012/11/cumulative-impact-factor-benchmarking.html - A working document from SIPS on making replications discoverable (including Google scholar) https://osf.io/57zxa/ Find us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast www.twitter.com/dsquintana www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Dan and James chat about science journalism with Brian Resnick (@b_resnick), who is a science reporter at Vox.com. Here’s what they cover: Should scientists be worried that their work will be misrepresented when talking to the media? [0:58] How Brian approaches science journalism [8:53] It’s ok to challenge the assumptions of science journalists [16:57] How do you write a great headline? [19:13] How does Brian appraise the quality of research? [29:50] Should psychiatrists (or journalists) diagnose the US President? [32:50] Stories in science that no one knows the answer to [36:58] How to promote your research without going via your institution’s media department [40:24] The best way to pitch your research to a science journalist [44:25] How pre-preprints are great for research addressing current events [48:45] How scientists can improve their science communication writing [53:15] Dick jokes in science writing — yes or no? [54:30] What has Brian changed his mind about? [56:37] Brian’s book recommendation [58:05] Links: Brian’s pieces at Vox - https://www.vox.com/authors/brian-resnick The twitter poll that Dan was referring to - https://twitter.com/kylejasmin/status/960065733551181824?lang=en The Weeds podcast episode on the Goldwater rule - https://art19.com/shows/the-weeds/episodes/72d4c65f-2d2a-4925-8bb6-7d6ca93cb561 Brian’s email - Brian@vox.com Brian on Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/b_resnick Books mentioned: We have no idea - https://www.amazon.com/We-Have-No-Idea-Universe/dp/0735211515 Does it fart? - https://www.amazon.com/Does-Fart-Definitive-Animal-Flatulence/dp/0316484156/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8 Find us on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Brian Resnick.

Dan and James chat about the adoption of open science practices with Dorothy Bishop, Professor of Developmental Neuropsychology at the University of Oxford. Here are some highlights from the show: Why Dorothy starting adopting open science practices Forking paths of analysis Dorothy’s experience with her first registered report Issues around data deposition When someone finds an error in your data What happens when a senior researcher is using questionable research practices? What to do when you’re caught doing something wrong Detecting errors in other papers The potential for open data to be weaponised How error detection is interpersonally difficult Carving out time for non-work pursuits The benefits of writing fiction when you're a scientist Using video for science communication James Heathers: Cat dealer Promoting your research vs. promoting yourself Dorothy’s book recommendation Links Dan Gilbert’s paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6277/1037.2 Merchants of doubt [book]: https://www.amazon.com/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1608193942 Dorothy's blog: deevybee.blogspot.com Dorothy's crime novels: https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=dpbylinesrebooks1?ie=UTF8&field-author=Deevy+Bishop&search-alias=digital-text&text=Deevy+Bishop&sort=relevancerank Dorothy on Twitter: twitter.com/deevybee Find us on Twitter twitter.com/hertzpodcast twitter.com/dsquintana twitter.com/jamesheathers Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Dorothy Bishop.

Dan and James chat with Greg Nuckols, who is grad student in exercise physiology, strength coach, and writer at strongerbyscience.com What they cover in this episode: Why Greg blogs his papers before preprints How Greg combines his business with his grad study Getting your research to your audience without publishing in scientific journals The limitations of traditional publishing Addressing popular misconceptions in research Are questionable research practices as bad in sports science as they are in psychology? Being an “academic outsider” can be tough, but it has some advantages The work that goes into exercise physiology studies How practical are multilab research projects in sports science? Exercise “experts” on Instagram Using Instagram to disseminate research Greg’s go-to resources for learning about open science What Greg’s changed his mind about How Greg’s planning on funding his future research without grants Links Scihub - whereisscihub.now.sh Greg on Twitter - twitter.com/GregNuckols Greg's website and newsletter - https://www.strongerbyscience.com Stronger by Science on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/strongerbyscience/ Chris Beardsly on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/chrisabeardsley/ Data colada - http://datacolada.org Slatestar codex - http://slatestarcodex.com Jordan Anaya's blog - https://medium.com/@OmnesRes SportRXiv - http://sportrxiv.org Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Greg Nuckols.

Dan and James answer listener questions on academic conferences, getting abreast of the literature, and conflicts of interest. Here are more details of what's on this episode: How question times during conference seminars are useless Choosing which conferences to attend as a PhD student Feedback from our Registered Reports episode with Chris Chambers (Episode 56) People that have binged our entire back catalogue The amount of reading do you need to do to keep track of the field you work in PhD students need time to make time to read the literature People sending out half-arsed work hoping that peer-review will “fix it” Guest authorship When you’re a native English speaker and get asked to have your manuscript proofed by a native English speaker Is it a conflict of interest to a review a paper with that includes someone you’ve co-authored with in the past on a different topic? The Frontiers journal model Reviewing papers so that authors are actually grateful for your criticism Links Nuzzle: http://nuzzel.com Pocket: https://getpocket.com Mendeley: http://mendeley.com Find us on Twitter: twitter.com/hertzpodcast twitter.com/dsquintana twitter.com/jamesheathers Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Despite cosmetic changes, scientific journals haven't changed that much over the past few decades. So what if we were to completely rethink how a scientific journal should operate in today's environment? Dan and James are joined by Rickard Carlsson (Linnaeus University, Sweden), who is the Co-Editor of the new "Meta-Psychology" journal. Here's what they cover: Why start a new psychology journal? What’s new about this journal? How does the journal have no subscription fees and no article processing fees? How does a new journal increase its profile? The difficulties in publishing negative results The limits of study pre-registration Are data archiving requirements unrealistic? Open polices and the Swedish constitution How can we make data anonymous? What’s the hardest thing about starting a journal? What would success look like for this new journal? What has Rickard changed his mind about recently? What’s one book or paper that Rickard thinks everyone should read Links The Daniel Lakens blog post on JPSP (The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) http://daniellakens.blogspot.no/2018/03/the-journal-of-personality-and-social.html Statistical rethinking book http://xcelab.net/rm/statistical-rethinking/ Psych methods Facebook group https://www.facebook.com/groups/853552931365745/ Twitter handles Everything Hertz - @hertzpodcast Rickard - @RickCarlsson Dan - @dsquintana James - @JamesHeathers Music credits - Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Rickard Carlsson.

Dan and James are joined by Simine Vazire (University of California, Davis and co-host of the Black Goat podcast) to chat about the role of podcasting in scientific communication. Dan's wife also starts going into labor during the episode, so this is an extra special one - make sure you listen through the ENTIRE episode. Here's what the cover: Why Simine started podcasting The perils of being a "methodologist terrorist" researcher Why podcast when you could blog or tweet? Dan and James’ favourite things about podcasting The current role of blogs Navigating the public/private crossover of science communication How much do we censor our podcasts? Should Journal editors tweet and podcast in a personal capacity? Should early career researchers podcast? The costs of not speaking above your station What equipment does we use to record podcasts? Two vs. three podcast hosts? How do you know when you have a good podcast? What type of person is suited to podcasting? What book does Simine think everyone should read? What’s something Simine’s changed her mind about recently? Links Ed Vul Social neuroscience paper https://gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/wiki/whynhow/images/e/ef/Vuletalorigpaper.pdf Snowball ice microphone https://www.bluedesigns.com/products/snowball/ Black Goat podcast http://www.theblackgoatpodcast.com James’ advice for PhDs https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/12-thing-you-should-know-before-you-start-a-phd-9c064a979e8 Understanding Psychology as a Science https://www.macmillanihe.com/page/detail/Understanding-Psychology-as-a-Science/?K=9780230542303 What is this thing called science? https://www.amazon.com/What-This-Thing-Called-Science/dp/162466038X/ref=dpobtitle_bk Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Simine Vazire.

Dan and James are joined by Rebecca Willén (Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education) to discuss transparency in scientific research and how she started her own independent research institute in Bali. Here's what they cover: Rebecca explains the story behind her practice of sharing disclosure statements for her published work Many people are changing their research practices for the better for current research - but what about their past research? The 21 word solution Using disclosure statements in your pHD The state of research openness in forensic psychology The flexibility in determining a primary outcome How and why Rebecca founded the IGDORE research institute The drawbacks to starting your own research institute Rebecca’s recommendation for getting started with open science The story behind the RONIN institute Links - IGDORE https://igdore.org Rebecca’s website https://rmwillen.info 21 word solution https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2160588 PNAS article questioning whether there’s a reporducability crisis http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/03/08/1708272114 IGDORE Open Science meetup https://igdore.org/open-science-meetup-bali-2018/ IGDORE affiliation https://igdore.org/affiliation/ RONIN institute http://ronininstitute.org XKCD theme for R http://xkcd.r-forge.r-project.org GNU manifesto https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html Twitter: @hertzpodcast, @dsquintana, @jamesheathers, and @rmwillen Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Rebecca Willén.

Dan and James are joined by Chris Chambers (Cardiff University) to discuss the Registered Reports format. Here’s an overview of what they covered: What is a registered report and why should we implement them? [1:47] The impact of conscious and unconscious bias on scientific publication [6:17] Common objections to registered reports [8:21] The slippery slope fallacy [14:33] The advantages of registered reports for early career researchers [15:47] The generational divide for embracing methodological reforms [19:13] The launch of registered reports in 2013 [23:30] The “tone debate” in psychology [24:50] Dealing with publishing decisions as an early career researcher [27:30] Using registered reports to disarm your research rivals [30:52] A peek behind the curtain of peer-review [34:40] How do we convince journals to take up the registered report format? [36:28] Using registered reports for meta-analysis [38:40] What’s something that Chris has changed his mind about recently? [43:14] What’s Chris’ favourite failure? [48:23] Chris’ opinion of Wales [51:49] Links The Seven Deadly Sins of Psychology https://www.amazon.com/Seven-Deadly-Sins-Psychology-Scientific/dp/0691158908 Chris Chambers on Twitter @chrisdc77 Dorothy Bishop’s blog on how registered reports provides better control of the publication timeline http://deevybee.blogspot.no/2016/03/better-control-of-publication-time-line.html The Startup Scientist podcast https://shows.pippa.io/startupscientist Startup scientist on Twitter @Startup_sci The open science pyramid (slide 8) https://osf.io/yq59d/ The Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology “power posing” issue http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rrsp20/2/1?nav=tocList Dan on Twitter @dsquintana James on Twitter @JamesHeathers Music credits Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Chris Chambers.

In this episode, Dan and James discuss the US National Institutes of Health's new definition of a “clinical trial”, which comes into effect on the 25th of January. Here’s the new definition: “A research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioural outcomes”. Over the course of this episode, they cover the pros and cons of this decision along with the implications for researchers and science in general. Here are a few things they cover: The traditional definition of a clinical trial We go through James’ old work to determine if he’s been a clinical trialist all along The lack of clarity surrounding the new definition Why are adopting a clinical trial approach when this approach has obvious weaknesses? What do you actually have to do when running a clinical trial? Will institutions also adopt this new definition, thus putting basic research through clinical trial IRBs? What if this extra red tape actually improves science? One argument against the proposal is that registering more studies on clinicaltrials.gov will confuse the public. We don’t buy that. Clinical trial registrations generally miss the many nuances of study design The new clinical trial definition will eliminate some of the ‘forking paths’ when analysing and reporting data How this new definition will affect grant applications for early career researchers? What happens to exploratory research? NIH case studies of what may constitute a clinical trial Links NIH clinical trial definition https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/definition.htm The NIH “clinical trial decision tree” https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/CT-decision-tree.pdf NIH case studies of what may constitute a clinical trial https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/case-studies.htm#case1

In this episode, James sits in the guest chair as Dan interviews him on his recent work find and exposing inconsistent results in the scientific literature. Stuff they cover: How James got into finding and exposing inconsistent results The critiques of James’ critiques How James would do things differently, if he were start over again? Separating nefarious motives from sloppiness The indirect victims of sloppy science Grants that fund sloppy science take resources from responsible science projects If people actually posted their data and methods, James’ job would be much easier Registered reports improve the quality of science If James could show one slide to every introductory psychology lecture what would it say? The one thing James believes that others think is crazy What James has changed his mind about in the last year Links The Sokal hoax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair James’ Psychological Science paper: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797615572908 The @IamSciComm Tweetstorm on podcasting: https://twitter.com/iamscicomm/status/935851867661357057

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 said Will 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 Netherlands Outcome 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 Editor Links: The science communication Twitter thread https://twitter.com/ocaptmycapt/status/927193779693645825 ERC comics https://www.erccomics.com The “skin in the game” tweet https://twitter.com/paperbag1/status/914923706648055813 That study in neuopsychopharmacology on a IL-6 receptor antibody to treat residual symptoms in schizophrenia https://www.nature.com/articles/npp2017258

In this episode, Dan and James welcome back Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) to discuss his new paper on justifying your alpha level. Highlights: Why did Daniel write this paper? Turning away from mindless statistics Incremental vs. seismic change in statistical practice The limitations to justifying your alpha The benefits of registered reports Daniel’s coursera course What’s better? Two pre-registered studies at .05 or one unregistered study at .005? Testing at the start of semester vs. the end of semester Thinking of controlling for Type 1 errors as driving speed limits Error rates mean different things between fields What if we applied the “5 Sigma” threshold used in physics to the biobehavioral sciences? What about abandoning statistical significance How did Daniel co-ordinate a paper with 88 co-authors? Using time zones to your benefit when collaborating How can junior researchers contribute to these types of discussions? Science by discussion, not manifesto The dangers of blanket recommendations How do you actually justify your alpha from scratch? Links Daniel on Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/lakens Daniel’s courser course - https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Justify your alpha paper - https://psyarxiv.com/9s3y6 Abandon statistical significance - https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07588 Using the costs of error rates to set your alpha - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00625.x Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Jessica Polka, Director of ASAPbio, to chat about preprints. Highlights: What is ASAPbio? Differences between the publication processes in the biological sciences vs. the biomedical sciences Common concerns with preprints Media embargoes How peer review isn’t necessarily a mark of quality Do preprints make it harder to curate information? Specialty preprint servers vs. broad servers? How well do you need to format your preprint? How do you bring up preprints to lab heads and PIs? An example of a good preprint experience from Dan Using preprints for your grant applications What Jessica has changed her mind about The one article that Jessica thinks everyone should read Links Jessica's Twitter account - @jessicapolka ASAPbio - http://asapbio.org & @asapbio_ Rescuing Biomedical science conference 2014 resources - http://rescuingbiomedicalresearch.org/events/ Sherpa/Romeo - http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php PaleoArxiv - https://osf.io/preprints/paleorxiv Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructures paper - https://figshare.com/articles/PrinciplesforOpenScholarlyInfrastructures_v1/1314859 Special Guest: Jessica Polka.

Dan and James celebrate their 50th episode with a live recording! They cover a blog post that argues grad students shouldn’t be publishing, what’s expected of today’s postdocs, and the ‘tone’ debate in psychology. BONUS: You can also watch the video of this episode on the Everything Hertz podcast channel (link below) Other stuff they cover: James offends a sociologist, as is his wont The argument for why grad students shouldn’t publish Gatekeepers controlling what’s being published Editors that Google authors before sending papers out for review Judging researchers on their institution’s location James on networking How do you challenge reviewers when they say you are "too junior" The standards of Frontiers papers Writing review papers for the wrong reasons Why are there so many meta-analyses? Pre-registering your meta-analysis Registered reports vs. pre-registration What’s expected of today’s postdocs How many papers should you peer review? How James tried to ward off review requests Things that millennials are ruining The role of humour in the tone debate Links Episode video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj3WsTiUuLo&t=3s The “should grad students publish" article: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/23/renewed-debate-over-whether-graduate-students-should-publish#.WaGAeN_v8jI.link Prospero meta-analysis registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ Eiko Fried’s tweet on postdoc expectations: https://twitter.com/eikofried/status/902470702892290048 James’ publons profile: https://publons.com/author/1171358/james-aj-heathers#profile JANE: http://jane.biosemantics.org Anonymous PubPeer comments: https://pubpeer.com/publications/0E0DAEBEC6183646F18F4FAED03B1A#7

In this episode Dan and James discuss a forthcoming paper that's causing a bit of a stir by proposing that biobehavioral scientists should use a 0.005 p-value statistical significance threshold instead of 0.05. Stuff they cover: A summary of the paper and how they decided on 0.005. Whether raising the threshold the best way to improve reproducibility? Is 0.005 too stringent? Would this new threshold unfairly favour “super” labs? If we keep shifting the number does any threshold really matter? Dan and James’ first impressions of the paper A crash course on Mediterranean taxation systems What would a 0.005 threshold practically mean for researchers? Links The paper https://osf.io/mky9j/ ENIGMA consortium http://enigma.ini.usc.edu Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Dan and James are joined by Jason Hoyt, who is the CEO and co-founder of PeerJ, an open access journal for the biological and medical sciences. Here's some of what they cover: PeerJ’s model and how it got started What goes into running a journal Impact factors vs. low-cost publishing When the journal user experience is too good Getting a quick reviewer turnaround The need scientists to change their practices (not publishers) PeerJ’s membership model Glamour journals Future plans for PeerJ Predatory journals Researchers don’t want cheap journals, only impact factors Links - PeerJ: https://peerj.com - The Phoenix project: https://www.amazon.com/Phoenix-Project-DevOps-Helping-Business-ebook/dp/B00AZRBLHO - The Goal: https://www.amazon.com/Goal-Process-Ongoing-Improvement-ebook/dp/B002LHRM2O/ref=pdsim3512?encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=EMTE1M9W2XW5Q24X4GE8 Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Jason Hoyt.

In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Anne Scheel (LMU Munich) to discuss open science advocacy. Highlights: - How Anne became an open science advocate - Open science is better science - Methodological terrorists/freedom fighters - The time Anne stood up after a conference keynote and asked a question - Asking poor PhD students to pay for conference costs upfront and then reimbursing them 6 months later - Is it worth if for early career researchers to push open science practices? - How to begin with implementing open science practices - Power analysis should be normal practice, it shouldn’t be controversial - Anne’s going to start a podcast - The 100%CI: A long copy blog with 4 writers - The benefits of preprints and blogging - Science communication in English for non-native English speakers - Doing stuff that interests you vs. stuff that’s meant to advance your career Twitter accounts of people/things we mentioned: @dalejbarr - 2:10 @siminevazire - 2:45 @lakens - 2:45 @nicebread303 (Felix Schönbrodt)- 3:50 @annaveer - 21:40 @methodpodcast - 29:20 @the100ci - 30:40 @realscientists - 31:40 @upulie - 31:55 @fMRIguy (Jens Foell) - 32:20 @realsciDE (Real scientists Germany) - 32:30 @maltoesermalte, @rca, @dingdingpeng (100% CI team) - 33:55 @stuartJRitchie - 65:05 Links - Early Career Researchers and publishing practices: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1102/full (paywalled) - Pre-registration in social psychology—A discussion and suggested template” Paywalled link: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103116301925, Preprint link: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/4frms/ - The CI 100%: http://www.the100.ci Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Anne Scheel.

In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Andy Field (University of Sussex), author of the “Discovering Statistics” textbook series, to chat about statistical literacy. Highlights: The story behind Andy’s new book SPSS and Bayesian statistics Andy explains why he thinks the biggest problem in science is statistical illiteracy Researcher degrees of freedom and p-hacking The story behind the the first version of ‘Discovering statistics’ How to improve your statistical literacy Does peer review improve the statistics of papers Researchers will draw different conclusions on the same dataset The American Statistical Association’s statement on p-values How has the teaching of statistics for psychology degrees changed over the years Andy fact checks his own Wikipedia page Andy’s thoughts on Bayesian statistics and how he applied it in a recent paper The peer review of new statistical methods Andy’s future textbook plans The rudeness of mailing lists/discussion forums What is something academia or stats-related that Andy believes that others think is crazy? The one book that Andy recommends that everyone should read We learn the crossover in James and Andy’s taste in metal bands Links Andy’s books: https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/author/andy-field-0 The ‘PENIS of statistics’ lecture from Andy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe3_DeLC2JE Daniel Lakens’ Coursera course: https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences The American Statistical Association’s statement on p-values: http://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108 The refereeing decision paper: https://osf.io/gvm2z/ R stan: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rstan/index.html Statistical rethinking book: https://www.crcpress.com/Statistical-Rethinking-A-Bayesian-Course-with-Examples-in-R-and-Stan/McElreath/p/book/9781482253443 Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Andy Field.

It’s conference season so in this episode Dan and James discuss the ins and outs of scientific conferences. Here’s what they cover: Research parasite award How much do you save when you don’t run an fMRI study They come up with an even better name than “Research parasite” Could the GOP weaponise the open science movement? Conspiracy theories Attempts to slow down science by taking science out of context The Black Goat Podcast The conference backchannel Contacting people at conferences Sitting though seminars (and not falling asleep) Twitter conferences Good presentations vs. bad presentations Starting collaborations at conferences Do conference locations matter? Periscoping conference presentations Links The research parasite award: http://researchparasite.com The GOP and science reform https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/04/reproducibility-science-open-judoflip/521952/ The Crackpot index http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html The Brain Twitter conference https://brain.tc Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

James and Dan are joined by Nick Brown (University of Groningen) to discuss how the New Bad People — also known as shameless little bullies, vigilantes, the self-appointed data police, angry nothings, scientific McCarthyites, second-stringers, whiners, the Stasi, destructo-critics, and wackaloons* — are trying to improve science Here’s what they cover Power imbalances in academia Publication bias Euphemisms for people who are publicly critical of science How to go about questioning the scientific record Peer reviewed criticism vs. blog posts Making meta-analysis easier Data-recycling Well-being and genomics Popular science books and conflicts of interest The ‘typical’ response to a Letter to an Editor What Dan and James do during the breaks Why don’t people report descriptive statistics anymore? Priming studies Science in the media What Nick has changed his mind about Links Nick on Twitter - @sTeamTraen Nick’s blog - http://steamtraen.blogspot.no * This list is from one of James’ blog posts https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/meet-the-new-bad-people-4922137949a1 Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Nick Brown.

Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) joins James and Dan to talk meta-analysis. Here’s what they cover: Daniel’s opinion on the current state of meta-analysis The benefit of reporting guidelines (even though hardly anyone actually follows them) How fixing publication bias can fix science Meta-analysis before and after that Bem paper How to correct for publication bias Whether meta-analyses are just published for the citations The benefits of pre-registering meta-analysis How we get people to share their data How sharing data doesn’t just benefit others - it also helps you replicate your own analyses later Success is tied to funding, no matter how “cheap” your research is How people can say “yes” to cumulative science, but “no” to sharing data Responding to mistakes How to find errors in your own papers before submission We ask Daniel: i) If he could should one slide to every introductory psychology lecture in the world, what would say?, ii) What has he changed his mind about in the last few years?, iii) The one book/paper he thinks everyone should read Daniel also gives James and Dan ideas for their 50th episode Links Daniel on Twitter - @lakens Daniel’s course - www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Daniel’s blog - daniellakens.blogspot.no Daniel’s recommended book - Understanding Psychology as a science https://he.palgrave.com/page/detail/?sf1=barcode&st1=9780230542303 Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/ Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) drops in to talk statistical inference with James and Dan. Here’s what they cover: How did Daniel get into statistical inference? Are we overdoing the Frequentist vs. Bayes debate? What situations better suit Bayesian inference? The over advertising of Bayesian inference Study design is underrated The limits of p-values Why not report both p-values and Bayes factors? The “perfect t-test” script and the difference between Student’s and Welch’s t-tests The two-one sided test Frequentist and Bayesian approaches for stopping procedures Why James and Dan started the podcast The worst bits of advice that Daniel has heard about statistical inference Dan discuss a new preprint on Bayes factors in psychiatry Statistical power Excel isn’t all bad… The importance of accessible software We ask Daniel about his research workflow - how does he get stuff done? Using blog posts as a way of gauging interest in a topic Chris Chambers’ new book: The seven deadly sins of psychology Even more names for methodological terrorists Links Daniel on Twitter - @lakens Daniel’s course - https://www.coursera.org/learn/statistical-inferences Daniel’s blog - http://daniellakens.blogspot.no TOSTER - http://daniellakens.blogspot.no/2016/12/tost-equivalence-testing-r-package.html Dan’s preprint on Bayesian alternatives for psychiatry research - https://osf.io/sgpe9/ Understanding the new statistics - https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-New-Statistics-Meta-Analysis-Multivariate/dp/041587968X Daniel’s effect size paper - http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863/full The seven deadly sins of Psychology - http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10970.html Special Guest: Daniel Lakens.

In this episode, Dan and James are joined by William Gunn (Director of Scholarly communications at Elsevier) to discuss ways in which you can object to published research. They also cover: What differentiates an analytics company from a publishing company? How scientific journals are one of the last areas to fully adopt the dynamic nature of the internet Data repositories How to make a correction in a journal The benefits of Registered Reports When everyone asked Elsevier for a journal of negative results but no one submitted to them How unit of publication isn’t really indicative of science as a process Altmetrics and gaming the system How to appeal to a journal about a paper Citation cartels: the dumbest crime William’s switch from research to publishing and his shift in perspective The crackpot index James’ flowchart on how to contact an editor The copyediting process Elsevier’s approach to open peer review: should junior researchers be worried? The one thing William thinks that everyone else thinks is crazy William’s most worthwhile career investment The one paper that William thinks everyone should read Links Williams’s twitter account: @mrgunn Williams’s blog: http://synthesis.williamgunn.org The Crackpot index: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html The paper William thinks everyone should read: http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/8/341/341ps12.full Special Guest: William Gunn.

Dan and James are joined by Michèle Nuijten (Tilburg University) to discuss 'statcheck', an algorithm that automatically scans papers for statistical tests, recomputes p-values, and flags inconsistencies. They also cover: - How Michèle dealt with statcheck criticisms - Psychological Science’s pilot of statcheck for journal submissions - Detecting data fraud - When should a journal issue a correction? - Future plans for statcheck - The one thing Michèle thinks that everyone else thinks is crazy - Michèle's most worthwhile career investment - The one paper that Michèle thinks everyone should read Links Michèle's website: https://mbnuijten.com Michèle's twitter account: https://twitter.com/michelenuijten Statcheck: https://statcheck.io Tilberg University meta-research center: http://metaresearch.nl Guardian story on detecting science fraud: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/feb/01/high-tech-war-on-science The paper Michèle thinks everyone should read: http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/DPlab/papers/publishedPapers/Simmons2011False-Positive%20Psychology.pdf Everything Hertz on Twitter: https://twitter.com/hertzpodcast Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast The startup scientist, Dan's other podcast on boosting your scientific career: https://soundcloud.com/startup-scientist-podcast Special Guest: Michèle Nuijten.

We all know hipsters. You know, like the guy that rides his Penny-farthing to the local cafe to write his memoirs on a typewriter - just because its more ‘authentic’. In this episode, James and Dan discuss academic hipsters. These are people who insist you need to use specific tools in your science like R, python, and LaTeX. So should you start using these trendy tools despite the steep learning curve? Other stuff they cover: Why James finally jumped onto Twitter A new segment: 2-minutes hate The senior academic that blamed an uncredited co-author for data anomalies An infographic ranking science journalism quality that’s mostly wrong When to learn new tools, and when to stick with what you know Authorea as a good example of a compromise between "easy" and "reproducible" Links The science journalism infographic http://www.nature.com/news/science-journalism-can-be-evidence-based-compelling-and-wrong-1.21591 Facebook page www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Music credits: Lee Rosevere http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Dan and James continue their discussion on work/life balance in academia. They also suggest ways to get your work done within a sane amount of hours as well as how to pick the right lab. Some of the topics covered: Feedback from our last episode Why the podcast started in the first place The "Red Queen" problem Does the "70 hour lab" produce better work? Some experiments aren't suited to a 9-5 schedule More tips for anonomusly skiving off at work What are cognitive limits off focused work? Do early career researchers even earn the minimum wage when you factor in the hours worked? How James gets things done: Work on one thing at a time until it's done and protect your time How Dan gets things done: Pomodoros (40 mins work, 10 minute break), blocking social/news websites How do pick a lab to work in? Links Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In this episode, we talk work/life balance for early career researchers. Do you need to work a 70-hour week to be a successful scientist or can you actually have a life outside the lab? Some of the topics covered: An update on "the postdoc that didn't say no" story Brian Wansink's response De-identifying data in research The perils of public criticism Criticising the research vs. criticising the person Some sage advice from a senior academic on "Making science the centre of your life" Look for a boss that won't make insane demands of your time How much good work is really coming out of a 70-hour week? An old hack Dan used to do to pretend he was working on data when he was really just on twitter Links GRIM test calculator http://www.prepubmed.org/grim_test/ Jordan's follow-up post https://medium.com/@OmnesRes/the-donald-trump-of-food-research-49e2bc7daa41#.me8e97z51 Brian Wansink's response http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/statistical-heartburn-and-long-term-lessons The "Making science the centre of your life" slide https://twitter.com/hertzpodcast/status/832501121893724160 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In episode 34 we covered a blog post that highlighted questionable analytical approaches in psychology. That post mentioned four studies that resulted from this approach, which a team of researchers took a closer look into. Dan and James discuss the statistical inconsistencies that the authors reported in a recent preprint. Some of the topics covered: Trump (of course) A summary of the preprint The GRIM test to detect inconsistencies The researchers that accidently administered the equivalent of 300 cups of coffee to study participants How do we prevent inconsistent reporting? 21 word solution for research transparency Journals mandating statistical inconsistency checks, such as 'statcheck' Links The pre-print https://peerj.com/preprints/2748/ 'The grad student that didn't say no' blog post http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-advice/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no The caffeine study http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-38744307 Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group lab handbook (see page 6 for open science practices) http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/expsych/documents/targ/TARG%20Handbook%20161128.pdf 21 word solution http://spsp.org/sites/default/files/dialogue_26(2).pdf Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss a new paper in the inaugural issue of Nature Human Behaviour, "A manifesto for reproducible science". Some of the topics covered: What's a manfesto for reproducibility doing in a Nature group journal? Registered reports The importance of incentives to actually make change happen What people should report vs. what they actually report A common pitfall of published meta-analyses The reliance of metrics in hiring decisions and the impact of open science practices Tone police How do we transition to open science practices? SSRN preprints being bought by Elsevier Authors getting gouged by copyediting costs (and solutions) Does being 'double-blind' extend to doing your analysis blind Trial monitoring is expensive Links The paper http://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0021 Our paper on reporting standards in heart rate variability http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v6/n5/full/tp201673a.html Equator guidelines http://www.equator-network.org Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James have their very first guest! For this episode they're joined by Robin Kok (University of Southern Denmark) to talk e-health. They also cover a recent blog post that inadvertently highlighted questionable research practices in psychology. Some of the topics covered: The grad student who never said no Postdoc work/life balance Questionable research practices Torturing data (with rattan sticks) Using the GRIM test to assess data accuracy Unpaid internships Saying 'yes' to opportunities that come your way The Myers-Briggs test is rubbish What is e-health? Are e-health interventions efficacious? e-health intervention implementation issues The poor quality of psych intervention smartphone apps Using "Facebook Live" to broadcast conference presentations The future of e-health Links Robin's twitter account https://www.twitter.com/robinnkok "The grad student who never said no" blog post http://www.brianwansink.com/phd-types-only/the-grad-student-who-never-said-no The Buzzfeed quiz on 'Which Disney princess are you?' (James is Belle) https://www.buzzfeed.com/mccarricksean/which-disney-princes-are-you?utm_term=.riNJn5DbW#.ci9gL3Xq8 XKXD TornadoGuard comic https://xkcd.com/937/ The efficacy of e-health interventions http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wps.20151/abstract Wild West eHealth: Time to Hold our Horses? www.ehps.net/ehp/index.php/contents/article/download/765/pdf_44 Smartphone app interventions http://www.jmir.org/2013/11/e247/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Special Guest: Robin Kok.

Dan and James discuss Zombie theories, which are scientific ideas that continue to live on in the absence of evidence. Why do these ideas persist and how do we kill them for good? Some of the topics covered: Why do some ideas live on? Zombie theories in heart rate variability research Reasons why zombie theories proliferate more in the social sciences Attractiveness and simplicity Theories become brands Oxytocin zombie theories The power of shaming Ideas are corrected more quickly in smaller fields James' new interest in Cow ECG People using science as a weapon to open up hip pockets How do we kill these zombies for good? Manual vs. automated PubMed comments What's the impact of paper retraction on future citations? How do you correct the scientific record? Links Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss a new population study that linked health anxiety data with future heart disease. Some of the topics covered: Web MD and health anxiety How would healthy anxiety contribute to heart disease? A summary of the study Ischemic heart disease = coronary artery disease Do people with healthy anxiety take better care of thier health? Don't be fooled by percentage increase of risk for something that's rare There are some things you can't just randomize The pros and cons of big data collection Links The paper http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/11/e012914.full Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss a recent study of over one million Swedish men that found that higher resting heart rate late adolescence was associated with an increased risk for subsequent psychiatric illness. Some of the topics covered: How did these authors get such an enormous dataset? The benefits of testing so many people What we liked about the study (hint: lots of things) Measuring cardiovascular efficiency using a cycle ergometer The pitfalls of self-reported physical activity How the media covered this study Contextual factors - does the testing environment induce anxiety? Co-morbidity in psychiatry What would James do with 200,000 ECGs strips? Links The paper http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2569454 The Daily Mail story http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3875062/Why-heartbeat-teenager-affect-later-life-Boys-high-blood-pressure-risk-mental-health-problems-adults.html?linkId=30382089 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com

Dan and James discuss authorship in the biomedical sciences

Dan and James talk about how they learn new things. Some of the topics discussed: Internet memes Consolidating old ideas rather than learning new ones Why learn a new skill when you just get someone else to do it? A lesson of not having a good understanding statistical software... James and Dan butt heads about meta-analysis (again) Learning new things is interesting How did people learn things before the internet? How to follow things on Twitter without being on Twitter Links Bayes factor paper with 'primer' paper matrix https://alexanderetz.com/2016/02/07/understanding-bayes-how-to-become-a-bayesian-in-eight-easy-steps/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Pre-registration, p-hacking, power, protocols. All these concepts are pretty mainstream in 2016 but hardly discussed 5 years ago. In this episode, James and Dan talk about these ideas and other developments in biomedical science. Some of the topics discussed: James loves blinded reviews, scihub Dan loves protocols, learning stats through social media, reproducible science Links The COMPARE initiative - http://compare-trials.org "Give me the F-ing PDF" Chrome extension https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/give-me-the-f-ing-pdf/iekjpaipocoglamgpjoehfdemffdmami/related Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss complaints and grievances. Stay tuned for part 2 where things get positive. Some of the topics discussed: Conflicts of interest Criticism in psychology Why does there seem to be so much bad blood in psychology? Retracted papers: fraud or sloppiness? Authors not acknowledging your peer-review remarks The short-term nature of research The benefits of 'centers of excellence' Links The 'vibe of the thing' scene from 'The Castle' (Great Aussie film) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJuXIq7OazQ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com

When interpreting the magnitude of group differences using effect sizes, researchers often rely on Cohen's guidelines for small, medium, and large effects. However, Cohen originally proposed these guidelines as a fall back when the distribution of effect sizes was unknown. Despite the hundreds of available studies comparing heart rate variability (HRV), Cohen's guidelines are still used for interpretation. In this episode, Dan discusses his recent preprint describing an effect size distribution analysis on HRV studies. Some of the topics discussed: A summary of Dan's preprint What is an effect size? What can an effect size distribution tell us? How effect sizes can inform study planning How close are Cohen's guidelines to the distribution of HRV effect sizes? What samples sizes are appropriate? Pre-publication review vs. post-publication review Statcheck Links The preprint article http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/08/31/072660 Statcheck https://mbnuijten.com/statcheck/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com

P-values are universal, but do we really know what they mean? In this episode, Dan and James discuss a recent paper describing the failure to correctly interpret p-values in a sample of academic psychologists. Some of the topics discussed: Common p-value misconceptions James tests Dan on his p-value knowledge p-values vs. effect size The problem of sample size with p-value interpretation The Facebook mood manipulation study Data peeking Equivalent p-values do not represent equivalent results Meta-analytical thinking Using significance as a categorical factor Statistical vs. clinical significance Clinical trial registration and 'secondary outcome creep' Dan and James answer listener questions Science communicator vs. scientist Grant titles and the 'Pub test' NASA and social media Links The article http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01247/full Geoff Cumming's book (we got the name completely wrong - sorry Geoff!) http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-The-New-Statistics-Meta-Analysis-ebook/dp/B007M9D76G/ref=pdsimkstore_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=1QWKES82EP85DBAEKNT1 The story on research passing the 'pub' test https://theconversation.com/if-youre-going-to-ridicule-research-do-your-homework-64238 Real scientists http://realscientists.org Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com

Science funding has a series of built in incentive structures, but what sort of science does this produce? Some of the topics discussed: Feedback from our 'Public health and Pokemon' episode (#22) Incentive structures in science What we should be doing in science compared to what we are doing Quantity vs. Quality The analysis of Trump's tweets for negativity vs. positivity Pre-registration How much detail do you need to go into when it comes to pre-registering an analysis APS journal badges - they're working! Data sharing makes you more careful with your data Solutions to the incentive problem have to come from the policy level The grant funding lottery system proposal The PhD oversupply Gaming the system James wants to mandate science communication Dan wants to include replication studies in PhD programs Scientist names that suit their research area Links The article on incentive structures https://medium.com/the-spike/how-a-happy-moment-for-neuroscience-is-a-sad-moment-for-science-c4ba00336e9c#.x3sea13i1 The Allen brain atlas http://observatory.brain-map.org Analysis of Trump's tweets http://varianceexplained.org/r/trump-tweets/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Can you be a "serious academic" while still posting photos on Instagram? In this episode, James and Dan discuss a recent article bemoaning the infiltration of the "selfie epidemic" into academia. Some of the topics discussed: James and Dan share their thoughts on the article The REAL 'c' word.... Social media and conferences Snapchat + academics = snapademics Using Instagram stories to share you research Why "PHD comics" is so successful Criticism in academia Listener question 1: What's your favourite part of research? Listener question 2: What's your favourite technique or experiment to perform? Listener question 3: What's a funny story from being an academic? Links The article https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2016/aug/05/im-a-serious-academic-not-a-professional-instagrammer A response to the article https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2016/aug/05/im-a-non-serious-academic-i-make-no-apologies-for-this Snapademics https://twitter.com/snapademia Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Pokemon Go is sweeping the world and getting people walking again! But is the Pokemon Go 'model' a golden opportunity to tackle obesity or just another fad? Some of the topics discussed: James plays "Pokemon or Cholesterol medication?" Dan tries to explain Pokemon Go to James James' first contact with Pokemon Go "trainers" Should health interventions be modeled on Pokemon Go? Other exercise augmented reality health apps What's the app's endgame? Can health authorities copy this model? We make a correction from episode 17: PLoS is in fact a non-profit journal, not a for-profit journal Dan and James answer two listener questions: i) The dumbest things they've ever done in the lab (both related to email faux pas) ii) How often should lab meetings be run The importance of PROPERLY piloting your experiment If you don't know the person in the meeting that takes up too much time, it's probably you. Links The quiz http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/gaming/2016/07/pokemonorcholesterolmedicationa_quiz.html Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

It's well established that steroid use is associated with many adverse healthy outcomes, but what does it actually do to your brain? Dan and James discuss an interesting new paper that compared brain structure in long-term steroid users and non-using weightlifters. Some of the topics discussed: A summary of the study How are steroids typically used? What are the differences in use between sports? The recruitment of 'real' users James gives Dan a surprise Norwegian test (he doesn't do too well) The things Dan and James liked about the study (hint: many things) Steroid use in women Dose-dependent effects of steroids Folk beliefs surrounding steroid use James' goal of making his cat as jacked as possible If you have a great study, there's no need to oversell James' experience of participating in a growth hormone trial Links The paper http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000632231632529X Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Can psychologists learn more by studying fewer people? Some of the topics discussed: Brexit and science Can the UK take the 'Norway' option? Horizon 2020 The impact on personnel and research training Italian coffee Listener feedback We're sorry for the chewing sound from episode 17! Intraindividual replication vs. larger sample sizes What sort of experiments are better suited to detailed within-subject studies? Is 'quantified self' data more valid than experimental data? What if you happen to recruit a 'weird' person? Links The paper http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4911349/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss a recent paper on intranasal oxytocin and spirituality Some of the topics discussed: A summary of a recent paper on oxytocin and spirituality Why within-subject designs are a better choice for oxytocin research The physiology of nasal administration How do you control for differences in nasal environment Hypothesis-driven vs. exploratory research Oxytocin pathway gene ANCOVA and Lord's paradox (yep, it's called that) Dan applauding the authors for posting ALL their data online James disagrees with Dan on approaches to pre-registering studies James promises never to chew during a recording (sorry!) Producing research vs. actually reading other people's research Our first citation (sort of) How the replication crisis is the fact that we're not doing any Heart rate variability in oysters (and other animals) Links The paper http://scan.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2016/06/22/scan.nsw078 Dan's blog post on intranasal oxytocin administration considerations https://medium.com/@dsquintana/intranasal-drug-administration-in-psychiatry-80d076f1abdd#.dsdrrohdu Dan's paper on the promise and pitfalls of intranasal administration http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26552590 The data from the paper https://osf.io/mjhzw/ Our first (blog post) citation https://rhythmicpsychology.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/shock-shock-horror-horror/ Can we replicate the replication crisis? https://theconversation.com/is-psychology-really-in-crisis-60869 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Withholding data: bad science or scientific misconduct? Some of the topics discussed: Dan raises privacy issues surrounding sharing data What are the limits of AI to identify people from 'un-identifiable' data? The new age of sharing data What grinds Dan's gears Requesting data from people who said that they'd actually share their data James' experiences with requesting data Dan offers a solution for accessing data via an independent 3rd party When is a data request 'vexatious'? Hiding data vs. just being lazy with data management The importance of sharing your analysis code along with the data Version controlling manuscripts How much will open data actually improve science? 'Fake' journals masquerading as real ones Australia's windfarm commissioner (a real thing, unfortunalty) Australian coffee vs. the rest of the world Our Twitter followers numbers have surpassed our Facebook fans! Links The paper on requesting data http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22686633 The blog post on whether withholding your data is scientific misconduct http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2015/07/03/data-secrecy-bad-science-or-scientific-misconduct/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Do we really need scientific journals? Some of the topics discussed: James trolling predatory journals with jibberish papers on the 'DONG' effect How do these spammy journal invitation emails actually work? Formal journals vs. preprint servers The shift to preprints in psychology Why do some journals forbid preprints? An article defending the big publishers How much does it really cost to have an online journal? What if the public funders were to set up thier own journals? What's the role of post-pubication review? Do journals provide added value? James' brush with the 'established' media Links Publisher policies on preprints https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listofacademicjournalsbypreprintpolicy How much do universities pay for journal subscriptions? https://gowers.wordpress.com/2014/04/24/elsevier-journals-some-facts/ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

What are the defining characteristics of a good psychology study? We received this excellent question from a listener and decided to do a whole episode on this idea. Some of the topics discussed: When’s the last time you saw a psych study that only reported a t-test? Dan and James’ new paper on worry and heart rate variability Skepticism towards studies with many variables and ‘novel’ statistical approaches (that tend to always provide marvellous results) Repeated measures ANOVAs vs. linear mixed models Publishing convenient ideas, even if they’re wrong Fishing expeditions The ‘nocebo’ effect in action What are markers of study quality? Pre-registering studies - can it be gamed? The gradual improvement of psychology studies Links Dan and James' new paper on worry and heart rate variability http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27255891 The paper that said "Encouraging experimental psychologists to use LMMs was like giving shotguns to toddlers.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25657634 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss software and coding, including the tools they use Links (lots this week) Introduction to Python course - http://python.swaroopch.com //// R markdown - http://rmarkdown.rstudio.com //// GraphPad - http://www.graphpad.com //// JASP - https://jasp-stats.org //// Igor - https://www.wavemetrics.com/products/igorpro/igorpro.htm //// Canva - https://www.canva.com ////Omnifocus - https://www.omnigroup.com/omnifocus ////Slack - https://slack.com //// PsychoPy - http://www.psychopy.org //// 1Password - https://1password.com //// Papers - http://papersapp.com //// http://www.manuscriptsapp.com Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss public engagement, science communication, and the internet outrage machine. Links: James' GRIM pre-print https://peerj.com/preprints/2064v1/ Dan's meta-analysis paper http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01549/full Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James discuss a few academic horror stories sent in by their listeners. Links: The Gawker story on leaving academia http://gawker.com/i-left-my-ph-d-program-in-chemistry-a-few-years-back-wh-1774236393 Equator network http://www.equator-network.org Jack Johnson (the singer, not the boxer from the turn of the century) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seZMOTGCDag Abominable Putridity (the band James mentioned) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JYFgoaEeaQ Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Heart rate variability is becoming incredibly popular in the biobehavioral sciences yet there's no standard for how this research is reported. In this episode, Dan and James discuss their latest paper where they propose heart rate variability reporting guidelines. They also talk about saunas (why not?) and why 'sympathovagal balance' should be abandoned. Links: Dan and James' guidelines paper http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v6/n5/abs/tp201673a.html Dan and Gail's heart rate variability meta-analysis http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26447819 Quora https://www.quora.com Whole body hyperthermia study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27172277 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In this episode, James and Dan discuss issues surrounding the placebo effect. Links: Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Dan's other podcast https://soundcloud.com/startup-scientist-podcast

In this episode, James and Dan talk about failure. What's the benefit of openly sharing your failures - is this an antidote to the imposter syndrome or something only the privileged few can afford to do?

In this episode, James and Dan discuss what happens if your research is wrong. They talk about the recent controversy surrounding tDCS, why many people don't hold negative results to the same scrutiny as positive results, and the hype cycle of research. Links: Dan's new Startup Scientist podcast https://soundcloud.com/startup-scientist-podcast Vestibular stimulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanicvestibularstimulation The one slide on the tDCS presentation that Dan found https://twitter.com/nomorewires/status/717384486888022016 The hype cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In this episode, James and Dan discuss how to navigate the PhD to Postdoc transition. They provide advice to a hypothetical first-year graduate student and discuss the realities of the postdoc job market. Links: Propel Careers - https://www.propelcareers.com James' blog post - https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/12-thing-you-should-know-before-you-start-a-phd-9c064a979e8#.iqqwzf55s Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

How do you write a lot and do it well? In this episode, James and Dan discuss the writing process and the tools they use to get things done. Links: The Conversation https://theconversation.com BreakTime app http://breaktimeapp.com Tomato timer http://tomato-timer.com Jelte Wichert's paper http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026828 Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In this episode, James and Dan talk about getting from research idea to publication. They discuss the ethical approval process, getting research published, and share tips for running experiments. They also cover some of the software that they use in their own research: JASP and Papers. Links: JASP - https://jasp-stats.org Papers - http://www.papersapp.com Authorea - https://www.authorea.com Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

In this episode, James and Dan talk about replication in science, self-control, and the file-drawer problem in oxytocin research. Links: Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Meta-analysis has become an increasingly popular tool used by many scientists to synthesise data. However, it's not without its detractors — from H. J. Eysenck, Ph.D., calling it "an exercise in mega-silliness" in 1978, to J. A. J. Heathers Ph.D., describing its use as a "profound moral failing" (he's half-serious) in 2016. In this episode, Dan defends meta-analysis against more recent criticisms put forward by James and offers suggestions on how meta-analysis can be improved. Links: PRISMA statement - http://www.prisma-statement.org/ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast

Dan and James talk about Scihub and open access publishing.

Dan and James talk about nutrition and psychiatry. They also introduce themselves (you know, because that's what you do for your second episode) and explain the origin of their podcast name.

Dan and James discuss what to do if you want to collect heart rate variability (HRV) data, oxytocin parties (yes, they're a thing), and the peer review process.