Alle afleveringen
196 afleveringen, van nieuw naar oud
-
46: Statistical literacy (with Andy Field)
23 juni 2017 · 1 uur 20 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
45: Conferences and conspiracy theories
2 juni 2017 · 1 uur 2 min
It’s conference season so in this episode Dan and James discuss the ins and outs of scientific conferences. Lees meer
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/
-
44: Who’s afraid of the New Bad People? (with Nick Brown)
19 mei 2017 · 1 uur 9 min
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 Lees meer
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.
-
43: Death, taxes, and publication bias in meta-analysis (with Daniel Lakens)
5 mei 2017 · 1 uur 3 min
Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) joins James and Dan to talk meta-analysis. Lees meer
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.
-
42: Some of my best friends are Bayesians (with Daniel Lakens)
21 april 2017 · 1 uur 7 min
Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) drops in to talk statistical inference with James and Dan. Lees meer
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.
-
41: Objecting to published research (with William Gunn)
7 april 2017 · 1 uur 7 min
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. Lees meer
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.
-
40: Meta-research (with Michèle Nuijten)
24 maart 2017 · 49 min
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. Lees meer
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/Simmons_2011_False-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.
-
39: Academic hipsters
10 maart 2017 · 55 min
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? Lees meer
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/
-
38: Work/life balance - Part 2
24 februari 2017 · 1 uur 2 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
37: Work/life balance in academia
17 februari 2017 · 56 min
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? Lees meer
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
-
36: Statistical inconsistencies in published research
27 januari 2017 · 51 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
35: A manifesto for reproducible science
20 januari 2017 · 51 min
Dan and James discuss a new paper in the inaugural issue of Nature Human Behaviour, "A manifesto for reproducible science". Lees meer
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
-
34: E-health (with Robin Kok)
22 december 2016 · 1 uur
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. Lees meer
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.
-
33: Zombie theories
16 december 2016 · 44 min
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? Lees meer
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
-
32: Can worrying about getting sick make you sicker?
1 december 2016 · 43 min
Dan and James discuss a new population study that linked health anxiety data with future heart disease. Lees meer
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
-
31: Discover your psychiatric risk with this one weird trick
16 november 2016 · 55 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
30: Authorship
2 november 2016 · 49 min
Dan and James discuss authorship in the biomedical sciences
-
29: Learning new skills
16 oktober 2016 · 49 min
Dan and James talk about how they learn new things. Lees meer
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
-
28: Positive developments in biomedical science
30 september 2016 · 49 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
27: Complaints and grievances
23 september 2016 · 53 min
Dan and James discuss complaints and grievances. Stay tuned for part 2 where things get positive. Lees meer
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
-
26: Interpreting effect sizes
9 september 2016 · 46 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
25: Misunderstanding p-values
27 augustus 2016 · 55 min
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. Lees meer
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=pd_sim_kstore_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
-
24: Incentive structures in science
17 augustus 2016 · 1 uur
Science funding has a series of built in incentive structures, but what sort of science does this produce? Lees meer
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
-
23: Serious academics
11 augustus 2016 · 53 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
22: Pokemon and public health
3 augustus 2016 · 59 min
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? Lees meer
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/pokemon_or_cholesterol_medication_a_quiz.html
Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/
Twitter account
https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
-
21: This is your brain on steroids
22 juli 2016 · 58 min
It's well established that steroid use is associated with many adverse healthy outcomes, but what does it actually do to your brain? Lees meer
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
-
20: Sample sizes in psychology studies
13 juli 2016 · 1 uur 2 min
Can psychologists learn more by studying fewer people? Lees meer
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
-
19: Let us spray: oxytocin and spirituality
6 juli 2016 · 47 min
Dan and James discuss a recent paper on intranasal oxytocin and spirituality Lees meer
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
-
18: Data sharing
29 juni 2016 · 51 min
Withholding data: bad science or scientific misconduct? Lees meer
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
-
17: Journals: Do we need them?
22 juni 2016 · 51 min
Do we really need scientific journals? Lees meer
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/List_of_academic_journals_by_preprint_policy
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
-
16: What makes a good psych study?
15 juni 2016 · 49 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
15: Software and coding
8 juni 2016 · 45 min
Dan and James discuss software and coding, including the tools they use Lees meer
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
-
14: Science communication
2 juni 2016 · 33 min
Dan and James discuss public engagement, science communication, and the internet outrage machine. Lees meer
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
-
13: Academic horror stories
26 mei 2016 · 52 min
Dan and James discuss a few academic horror stories sent in by their listeners. Lees meer
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
-
12: Reporting heart rate variability studies
22 mei 2016 · 1 uur
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. Lees meer
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
-
11: The placebo effect
10 mei 2016 · 44 min
In this episode, James and Dan discuss issues surrounding the placebo effect. Lees meer
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
-
10: Failure
4 mei 2016 · 50 min
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?
-
9: What happens if your research is wrong?
28 april 2016 · 52 min
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. Lees meer
Links:
Dan's new Startup Scientist podcast
https://soundcloud.com/startup-scientist-podcast
Vestibular stimulation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_vestibular_stimulation
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
-
8: The PhD to Postdoc transition
20 april 2016 · 51 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
Episode 7: 7: The writing process
15 april 2016 · 50 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
6: The research pipeline - getting from idea to publication
7 april 2016 · 54 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
5: Do you even replicate?
30 maart 2016 · 45 min
In this episode, James and Dan talk about replication in science, self-control, and the file-drawer problem in oxytocin research. Lees meer
Links:
Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/
Twitter account
https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
-
4: Meta-analysis or mega-silliness?
22 maart 2016 · 40 min
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. Lees meer
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
-
3: Scientific publishing
16 maart 2016 · 49 min
Dan and James talk about Scihub and open access publishing.
-
2: Nutrition and Psychiatry
9 maart 2016 · 47 min
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.
-
1: So you want to measure heart rate variability...
2 maart 2016 · 44 min
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.