Everything Hertz

Latest Episodes:

75: Overlay journals (with Daniele Marinazzo) Jan 07, 2019

Show notes

We’re joined by Daniele Marinazzo (University of Ghent) to chat about the recently launched overlay journal Neurons, Behavior, Data analysis and Theory (NBDT), for which he on the Editorial Board.

An overlay journal is organised a set of manuscripts that is published and hosted by a seperate entity (in this case, the Arxiv server), a feature that dramatically reduces publication costs. We discuss the unique overlay model, how this can drive article fees to essentially zero, and what it takes to build a good community journal.

Here’s what we cover:

Why launch a new neuroscience journal and how is it different from currently established journals?
The unique way that editor’s decide which papers to send out for review
How does the journal operate when it’s open access and submissions only cost $10?
How do you build a journal that your target community will recognise as a ‘good’ journal?
The process of submitting a manuscript to NBDT
Should journals allow or encourage authors to suggest potential reviewers for their papers?
Using Twitter to find reviewers based on who’s ‘liked’ the preprint
Is posting a preprint on twitter actually useful?
What can neuroscience learn from the field of physics?
Authorship attribution
How can a journal better champion early career researchers?

Links...

NBDT journal: https://nbdt.scholasticahq.com
Danielle on twitter: https://twitter.com/dan_marinazzo
Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

$1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
$5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Special Guest: Daniele Marinazzo.

Support Everything Hertz

74: Seeing double (with Elisabeth Bik) Dec 19, 2018

Show notes

In this episode, Dan and James chat with microbiologist Elisabeth Bik about about the detection of problematic images in scientific papers, the state of microbiome research, and making the jump from academia to industry.

More info on what they cover:

How Elisabeth get into error detection of scientific images
The process of detecting errors in images
How groups of authors tend to publish multiple papers with problematic images
The association between journal prestige and problematic images
Providing monetary incentives for publications
Making the jump from academia to industry
The current state of microbiome research

Links

Patreon: www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast
Elisabeth on Twitter: www.twitter.com/microbiomdigest
Elisabeth online: https://microbiomedigest.com
The problematic image paper: https://mbio.asm.org/content/7/3/e00809-16.short
Pubpeer: https://pubpeer.com
Dan on twitter: www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter: www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter: www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook: www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

$1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
$5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Special Guest: Elisabeth Bik.

Support Everything Hertz

73: Update your damn syllabus Dec 03, 2018

Show notes

Dan and James discuss what's missing from biobehavioral science course syllabi.

Here's the episode lowdown:

A thank you to our new Patron supporters
The (supposed)CRISPR baby
SPSS vs. R: What should be used for instruction?
What would Dan and James include in a new syllabus?
Should students be taught scientific communication?
If we’re going to add new stuff to a syllabus, what gets removed?
Are courses too big these days?
Should students be taught how to set up a side hustle to apply their research skills outside of academia?

Links

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast
CRISPR baby story: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/11/30/18119589/crispr-technology-he-jiankui
Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

$1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
$5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Support Everything Hertz

72: Anonymity in scientific publishing Nov 16, 2018

Show notes

Dan and James discuss a new journal of "controversial ideas" that will allow authors to publish articles anonymously. They also launch their Patreon page, in which listeners can support the show and get bonus features.

Here's the episode lowdown

James describes his first experience eating a “ding dong”
Why James and Dan do the show
What is Patreon?
The Journal of Controversial Ideas
The link between a vaccine batch and narcolepsy in Norway
Can you “claim” our anonymous article a few years into the future?
What’s the difference between anonymous blogging and anonymous journal articles?
The new Neurons, Behavior, Data analysis and Theory journal

Links

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast
Narcolepsy paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389945713001548
Journal of Controversial ideas story: https://www.bbc.com/news/education-46146766
PsyBrief twitter account: twitter.com/psybrief
NBDT journal: nbdt.scholasticahq.com
Dan on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter: https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

$1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + the warm feeling you're supporting the show
$5 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + bonus audio (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)

Support Everything Hertz

71: Moving for your job Nov 05, 2018

Show notes

In this episode, we chat about whether it’s necessary to move for an academic job to demonstrate “independence”.

Here's a rundown of the other stuff we cover:

James' appearance at the “Sound education” conference
Dan’s first day of school as a latino in a white neighbourhood
Our thoughts on the restrictive social media policy at the SfN (Society for Neuroscience)conference
Why and how Dan and James moved overseas from Australia
Do you really need to move overseas to demonstrate independence?
The two-body problem
Can you demonstrate independence with sole-author papers?

Links

SFN social media policy https://twitter.com/fedeadolfi/status/1058760331747581953
Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support Everything Hertz

70: Doubling-blinding dog balls Oct 15, 2018

Show notes

Dan and James discuss the recent "grievance studies" hoax, whereby three people spent a year writing twenty-one fake manuscripts for submission to various cultural studies journals. They also discuss a new proposal to shift publication culture in which researchers pledge to publish exclusively in community-run journals but only when a pre-specified threshold of support for this commitment by the research community has been met.

Here's an overview of the episode:

It’s fat bear week!
The new proposal to fix the stranglehold of commercial publishers in academia
Flipping journals to open access
The ‘grievance studies’ hoax
When James first came across the “dog rape” paper
What if you were to design the dog study properly?
Should we systematically try and hoax journals?
Astronomy already injects fake data, can we learn from this?
Should these new hoaxes all be associated with Sokal?

Links

Brian Resnick’s fat bear week story: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/10/9/17955432/fat-bear-week-katmai-national-park-409-747-salmon
https://freeourknowledge.org
Paywall the movie: https://paywallthemovie.com
The ‘grievance studies’ hoax: https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/
James’ thread on the “dog-rape” study: https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1048313273563668486
The proposal for systematic hoaxing: https://twitter.com/Meaningness/status/1047507838493499392
A tweet from one of the reviewers of the dog paper: https://twitter.com/dwschieber/status/1047497301021798400
Fake (a.k.a. blind) injection in astronomy: https://www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection
The original Sokal paper: http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/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/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Support Everything Hertz

69: Open science tools (with Brian Nosek) Oct 09, 2018

Show notes

We’re joined by Brian Nosek (Centre for Open Science and University of Virginia) to chat about building technology to make open science easier to implement, and shifting the norms of science to make it more open. We also discuss his recent social sciences replication project in which researchers accurately predicted which studies would replicate.

Here’s what we cover:

What is the Centre for Open Science?
How did Brian go from Psychology professor to the director of tech organisation?
How can researchers use the Open Science Framework (OSF)?
How does OSF remove friction for conducting open science?
Registered reports (now available at 131 journals!)
What factors converged to cause the emerging acceptance of open science?
The social sciences replication project
Can researchers anticipate which findings can replicate?
What happened when Brian and his team tried to submit their replication attempts of Science papers to Science?
The experience of reviewing registered reports

Links:
Centre for open science https://cos.io
Open Science Framework https://osf.io
Project Implicit https://www.projectimplicit.net/index.html
The social sciences replication project paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0399-z
Brian on Twitter https://www.twitter.com/briannosek
Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Special Guest: Brian Nosek.

Support Everything Hertz

68: Friends don’t let friends believe in impact factors (with Nathan Hall) Sep 03, 2018

Show notes

This episode includes part two of a chat with Nathan Hall (McGill University), who is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say. Before getting to the discussion, James and Dan answer two listener questions on grants and data cleaning.

Here’s what is covered in the episode:

People talk about papers all the time, but the grant process is not discussed openly—why?
Speaking to your funding body’s relevant program officer
Assembling a team that complements your weaknesses
Data carpentry and the tidyverse
Outlier analysis
Nathan Hall on big publishing
Upending the publication system by getting journals to bid for papers
Using peer review quality to judge the quality of journals
Debunking learning styes
Academics chasing after celebrity and hype
The cost of chasing academic prestige
Using twitter hashtags like #PhDChat and #ECRchat to learn more about the experiences of other people

Links
Data carpentry https://datacarpentry.org/
The paper with detailed code https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03811-x
The podcast conference https://www.soundeducation.fm/
Cern and comic sans https://www.theverge.com/2012/7/4/3136652/cern-scientists-comic-sans-higgs-boson
Shit Academics Say on twitter https://www.twitter.com/AcademicsSay
Nathan on Twitter https://www.twitter.com/prof_nch
Dan on twitter https://www.twitter.com/dsquintana
James on twitter https://www.twitter.com/jamesheathers
Everything Hertz on twitter https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast
Everything Hertz on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/

Music credits: Lee Rosevere freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/

Special Guest: Nathan Hall.

Support Everything Hertz

67: Shit Academics Say (with Nathan Hall) Aug 20, 2018

Show notes

We’re joined by Nathan Hall (McGill University) to chat about the role of humour in academia. Nathan is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ Twitter account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say.

Here’s what we cover: