Alle afleveringen
196 afleveringen, van nieuw naar oud
-
96: The chaotic state of doctoral research
18 november 2019 · 48 min
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. Lees meer
Things they discuss...
James met an Australian member of parliament and won a commendation from Sense under Science
The Doing Good symposium
The Nature PhD survey
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
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 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/
-
95: All good presentations are alike; each bad presentation is bad in its own way
4 november 2019 · 1 uur 4 min
Dan and James discuss why academia tolerates bad presentations and the strange distrust of polished presentations. Lees meer
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 is spreading worldwide!
Why do some people not trust polished presentations?
The Mike Morrison episode on the Better Poster
The “I want a refund for a bad presentation” blog post
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
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 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
-
94: Predicting the replicability of research
21 oktober 2019 · 58 min
Dan and James chat with Fiona Fidler (University of Melbourne), who is leading the repliCATS project, 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! Lees meer
Here's what they discuss...
The story behind repliCATS
Australia's best export, Tim Tams
The SCORE project 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
The role of replicability in public policy
This is Bob Katter
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 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.
-
93: Double-blind peer review vs. open science
7 oktober 2019 · 55 min
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. Lees meer
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 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
-
92: Chaos in the brickyard
16 september 2019 · 1 uur 14 min
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. Lees meer
Links and details:
James has a new Hertz-quarters
The Metascience conference
How is google scholar influencing citation patterns
A slide from @Jevinwest's presentation 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, 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
Chaos in the brickyard paper
Chaos in the brickyard cartoon
Open data isn’t a new conceptOther 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 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 brickya…
-
91: Shifting the goalposts in statistics (with Kristin Sainani)
2 september 2019 · 1 uur 4 min
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. Lees meer
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 on scientific writing
The readability of scientific articles is decreasing
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
Kristin recommends this paper: P values are just the tip of the iceberg as well as the following books: Radium Girls and Bad Blood
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 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.
-
90: Mo data mo problems
19 augustus 2019 · 58 min
Dan and James discuss two listener questions on performing secondary data analysis and the potential for prestige to creep into open science reforms. Lees meer
More info and links:
Why generate your own dataset when you can get a high impact paper using public data?
Thanks to Stu Murray for the question
Will people steal your ideas?
The journal Scientific Data
Are we now incentivising data mining rather than data collecting?
Synthetic data
Dan’s recent synthetic data preprint primer
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 for the question, listen to our episode with him on e-health!
Did all the people who co-authored the paper to change statistical significance the default p-value threshold to .005 actually do this in subsequent papers?
Vagus nerve brain washing paper
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 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
-
89: Conflicts of interest in psychology (with Tom Chivers)
5 augustus 2019 · 1 uur
We chat with Tom about whether psychology has a conflict-of-interest problem and how to best define such conflicts. Lees meer
Links and other stuff we cover...
Tom's article 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
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
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 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
Special Guest: Tom Chivers.
-
88: The pomodoro episode
15 juli 2019 · 1 uur
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. Lees meer
Here are links and details...
James won an award
James’ new error detection tool, DEBIT
Academic dress codes
P-slacking
The p-slacking paper
Marcus Crede’s paper: A Negative Effect of a Contractive Pose Is Not Evidence for the Positive Effect of an Expansive Pose
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 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
-
87: Improving the scientific poster (with Mike Morrison)
1 juli 2019 · 51 min
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. Lees meer
Here's what we cover:
What’s the story behind the “better poster?”
The Better Poster video
The Better Poster template
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
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
A special give-away!
Other links
Mike on twitter
[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 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
Special Guest: Mike Morrison.
-
86: Should I stay or should I go?
17 juni 2019 · 1 uur 4 min
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. Lees meer
Other stuff they cover:
We don’t like cricket, oh no, we love it
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
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 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
-
85: GWAS big teeth you have, grandmother (with Kevin Mitchell)
3 juni 2019 · 1 uur 23 min
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". Lees meer
Other stuff we cover:
Kevin's book, "Innate: How the Wiring of Our Brains Shapes Who We Are"
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 (2017), Menegas et al (2018), Zalocusky et al (2016), Miyazaki et al (2018), Bercovici et al (2018), Orsini et al (2018)
Robustness and Evolvability in Living Systems (Wagner, A)
The Strategy of the Genes (Waddington, C)
Cybernetics : Or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (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 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 g…
-
84: A GPS in the Garden of Forking Paths (with Amy Orben)
21 mei 2019 · 52 min
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. Lees meer
Here are some more details and links:
The tweet 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: a way to run all theoretically defensible analysis options on a given dataset
Amy's Nature Human Behavior paper
Amy's PNAS paper
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
ReproducibiliTea stickers!
The UK Reproducibility network
Daniel Lakens' Coursera course
A multiverse of multiverses
Press releasing every paper might not be the best idea
Amy's book recommendation: The long way to a small angry planet
Other links
Amy on Twitter
[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 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. (Hos…
-
83: Back to our dirty unwashed roots
8 mei 2019 · 59 min
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. Lees meer
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 on this platform
Our dreams of a live Hertz episode
Is Fortnite killing our youth and the parallels with the “heavy metal” scare
Amy Orben’s screen time study
Multiverse analysis
Book recommendations: Kevin Mitchell’s "Innate", Gareth Leng's "Heart of the brain"
Daryl dug a hole reference, from the Aussie classic, "The Castle"
A new null oxytocin paper and the twitter response, and Dan's response
The SANS meeting venue
QR codes on posters
The slides to Dan’s oxytocin talk 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 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
-
82: More janitors and fewer architects
15 april 2019 · 1 uur 11 min
We answer a listener question on the possible negative consequences of the open science movement—are things moving too quickly? Lees meer
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!
Considering the potential downsides of open science
Here come dat boi meme explination
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”
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 and an explanation
Paul Roos and his “no dickheads” policy
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 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
-
81: Too Young To Know, Too Old To Care
1 april 2019 · 56 min
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. Lees meer
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: 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
Twitter thread from @drderringer
Me too Stem blog
Gideon on Twitter: @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 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
-
80: Cites are not endorsements (with Sean Rife)
17 maart 2019 · 52 min
We chat with Sean Rife, who the co-founder of scite.ai, a start-up that combines natural language processing with a network of experts to evaluate the veracity of scientific work. Lees meer
Here's what we cover and links for a few things we mention
What is scite.ai?
The Winnower
Why is there no good (and free) plagiarism detector?
Grobid - A machine learning library for extracting, parsing and re-structuring PDFs
Meta-analysis can prop up flawed bodies of literature
The "Too meta" XKCD cartoon
What’s the end game for scite?
The 80,000 hours game
Spooner, 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 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
Special Guest: Sean Rife.
-
79: Clinical trial reporting (with Henry Drysdale)
3 maart 2019 · 56 min
We chat with Henry Drysdale (University of Oxford), co-founder of the COMPare trials project, which compared clinical trial registrations with reported outcomes in five top medical journals and qualitatively analysed the responses to critical correspondence. Lees meer
Discussion points and links galore:
The history behind the COMPare project
The two papers that were published: a prospective cohort study correcting and monitoring 58 misreported trials and a qualitative analysis of researchers’ responses to critical correspondence
Ben Goldacre's books
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
Have the journals changed their practices?
COMPare on twitter
The COMPare website
Here is Henry on Twitter - @HenryMDrysdale
Here is Ben Goldacre on Twitter - @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 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
Special Guest: Henry Drysdale.
-
78: Large-scale collaborative science (with Lisa DeBruine)
17 februari 2019 · 59 min
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. Lees meer
Discussion points and links galore:
Deborah Apthorp's tweet on having to teach SPSS, "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
Danielle Navarro, and her R text book that you should read
Lisa's "faux" package for data simulation
Sometimes you can't share data, simulations are a good way around this problem
"synthpop" is the name of the package 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
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, typos and all
Using a Slack group for help
The psychological science accelerator
Chris Chartier (Psych Science Accelerator Director) on Twitter
A few of the other (hundreds) of folks involved with the Psych Science Accelerator Director: @PsySciAcc: @CRChartier @Ben_C_J @JkayFlake @hmoshontz
Lisa's Registered Report project on face rating
The challenges associated with collaborating with 100+ labs
Authorship order
Author contributions: CRediT taxonomy
The DARPA-funding project on using AI to determine reproducibility
Interacting Minds workshop 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 on equivalence test…
-
77: Promiscuous expertise
4 februari 2019 · 55 min
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 Lees meer
Here's what they cover...
The podcast will now be permanently archived on Open Science Framework
James did a talk at the Sound Education conference on podcasting for early career researchers. Here's the video 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 has FANS
The "Pete Evans" effect, James' solution, that we should eat Pete Evans, pesca-pescaterianism, and the spectacularly bad advice that we should stare into the sun
You should follow gynecologist Jennifer Gunter on Twitter
How much money would you pay for 100,000 engaged twitter followers? Here's the tweet James was referring to
Should researchers have something like a 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" project, and Rebecca Willen's CV
The "Nobel disease"
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 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 st…
-
76: Open peer review
21 januari 2019 · 48 min
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. Lees meer
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)
-
75: Overlay journals (with Daniele Marinazzo)
7 januari 2019 · 58 min
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. Lees meer
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 PLU…
-
74: Seeing double (with Elisabeth Bik)
19 december 2018 · 52 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
73: Update your damn syllabus
3 december 2018 · 1 uur 1 min
Dan and James discuss what's missing from biobehavioral science course syllabi. Lees meer
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)
-
72: Anonymity in scientific publishing
16 november 2018 · 58 min
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. Lees meer
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)
-
71: Moving for your job
5 november 2018 · 54 min
In this episode, we chat about whether it’s necessary to move for an academic job to demonstrate “independence”. Lees meer
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/
-
70: Doubling-blinding dog balls
15 oktober 2018 · 1 uur 7 min
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. Lees meer
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/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_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/everyt…
-
69: Open science tools (with Brian Nosek)
9 oktober 2018 · 49 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
68: Friends don’t let friends believe in impact factors (with Nathan Hall)
3 september 2018 · 1 uur 14 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
67: Shit Academics Say (with Nathan Hall)
20 augustus 2018 · 1 uur 3 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
66: Ideal worlds vs grim truths
6 augustus 2018 · 54 min
Dan and James answer listener questions on tips for starting your PhD and the role of statistics in exploratory research. Lees meer
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/
-
65: Blockchain and open science (with Jon Brock)
16 juli 2018 · 54 min
Dan and James chat with Jon Brock (Cognitive scientist at Frankl) about the use of blockchain technology for open science. Lees meer
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/Cryptographic_hash_function#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.
-
64: Salami slicing
2 juli 2018 · 1 uur 2 min
Dan and James talk about the recent SIPS conference answer a listener question on "salami slicing" the outcomes from one study into multiple papers. Lees meer
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/
-
63: Science journalism (with Brian Resnick)
18 juni 2018 · 1 uur 1 min
Dan and James chat about science journalism with Brian Resnick (@b_resnick), who is a science reporter at Vox.com. Lees meer
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.
-
62: Adopting open science practices (with Dorothy Bishop)
4 juni 2018 · 57 min
Dan and James chat about the adoption of open science practices with Dorothy Bishop, Professor of Developmental Neuropsychology at the University of Oxford. Lees meer
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=dp_byline_sr_ebooks_1?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.
-
61: Performance enhancing thugs (with Greg Nuckols)
21 mei 2018 · 56 min
Dan and James chat with Greg Nuckols, who is grad student in exercise physiology, strength coach, and writer at strongerbyscience.com Lees meer
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.
-
60: This is more of a comment than a question
8 mei 2018 · 1 uur 8 min
Dan and James answer listener questions on academic conferences, getting abreast of the literature, and conflicts of interest. Lees meer
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/
-
59: Rethinking the scientific journal (with Rickard Carlsson)
16 april 2018 · 1 uur 3 min
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? Lees meer
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.
-
58: Lessons from podcasting (with Simine Vazire)
2 april 2018 · 1 uur 1 min
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. Lees meer
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/Vul_et_al_orig_paper.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=dp_ob_title_bk
Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/
Special Guest: Simine Vazire.
-
57: Radical Transparency (with Rebecca Willén)
15 maart 2018 · 49 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
56: Registered reports (with Chris Chambers)
2 februari 2018 · 54 min
Dan and James are joined by Chris Chambers (Cardiff University) to discuss the Registered Reports format. Lees meer
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.
-
55: The proposal to redefine clinical trials
18 januari 2018 · 59 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
54: Cuckoo Science
15 december 2017 · 55 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
53: Skin in the game
17 november 2017 · 1 uur 7 min
Dan and James discuss whether you need to have “skin in the game” to critique research. Lees meer
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
-
52: Give p's a chance (with Daniel Lakens)
20 oktober 2017 · 1 uur 3 min
In this episode, Dan and James welcome back Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) to discuss his new paper on justifying your alpha level. Lees meer
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.
-
51: Preprints (with Jessica Polka)
6 oktober 2017 · 56 min
In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Jessica Polka, Director of ASAPbio, to chat about preprints. Lees meer
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/Principles_for_Open_Scholarly_Infrastructures_v1/1314859
Special Guest: Jessica Polka.
-
50: Special 50th episode (LIVE)
14 september 2017 · 1 uur 40 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
49: War and p's
31 juli 2017 · 56 min
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. Lees meer
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/
-
48: Breaking up with the impact factor (with Jason Hoyt)
21 juli 2017 · 54 min
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. Lees meer
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=pd_sim_351_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=EMTE1M9W2XW5Q24X4GE8
Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/
Special Guest: Jason Hoyt.
-
47: Truth bombs from a methodological freedom fighter (with Anne Scheel)
7 juli 2017 · 1 uur 9 min
In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Anne Scheel (LMU Munich) to discuss open science advocacy. Lees meer
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
@fMRI_guy (Jens Foell) - 32:20
@realsci_DE (Real scientists Germany) - 32:30
@maltoesermalte, @_r_c_a, @dingding_peng (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.