TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Science

    Everything Hertz

    Methodology, scientific life, and bad language. Co-hosted by Dr. Dan Quintana (University of Oslo) and Dr. James Heathers (Cipher Skin)

    Advertise
    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    125: Upon reasonable request Feb 01, 2021
    Show notes

    Dan has a blue-sky proposal to increase data sharing—that funders mandate scholars to store and analyse data on their servers for which the funder decides what constitutes a reasonable data request (among other benefits)

    Other stuff covered:

    • We return with part 2 of "overrated/underrated/appropately rated", in which James throws nouns at Dan and he responds with whether these things are overrated, underrated, or appropately rated.
    • Joe Hilgard's blog post
    • Dan' proposal that funders should require all funded researchers to store and perform their analysis on a central server, which would make it easier to share data, and then the funder could decide what "upon reasonable request" means, not the reseacher or the instution
    • Long term vs. short term reform efforts

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, February 1) "125: Upon reasonable request ", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/HR5JA

    Support Everything Hertz


    124: From Ptolemy to Takeshi's Castle Jan 18, 2021
    Show notes

    We discuss under which circumstances retracting decades-old articles is worth the time. We also chat about why LinkenIn is underrated (yes, really) and special journal issues are overrated.

    A more specific list of topics and links:

    • We play a game of "overated/underated", in which Dan has a list of stuff that he asks James whether these things are overrated or underated (or appropiated rated)
    • Why LinkedIn is underated
    • Graphical abstracts are underrated
    • Online conferences are underrated
    • Authors should have the chance to wildly speculate (as long as it's marked as wild speculation)
    • Sourdough bread is so gorgeous that even hipsters can't ruin it
    • Special journal themes are overrated
    • Should we bother putting the energy into retracting old studies?
    • The retracted article that Eysenck co-authored, entitled “Coffee-Drinking and Personality as Factors in the Genesis of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease”
    • THIS is Takeshi's Castle

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2021, January 18) "124: From Ptolemy to Takeshi's Castle", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/DG3PY

    Support Everything Hertz


    123: Authenticated anonymity (with Michael Eisen) Jan 04, 2021
    Show notes

    Part two of our chat with Michael Eisen (eLife Editor-in-Cheif), in which we discuss the pros and cons of collaborative peer review, journal submission interfaces, Michael's take on James' proposal that peer reviewers should be paid $450 dollars, why negative comments on peer reviews need to be normalised, plus much more.

    Some more details:

    • The pros and cons of collaborative peer review (in which all peer reviewers discuss the paper after all individual peer reviews have been submitted
    • How technology can constrain journal operations
    • The strange engineered delay in paper reviews (I doesn't take 2-3 weeks to review a paper)
    • Michael's proposal for a system in which people can nominate they have time in the near future to review a paper and then papers can be sent to them so they're rapidly reviewed
    • Journal submission interfaces
    • Michael's take on paying peer reviewers
    • Who owns peer reviews?
    • Would negative (anonomous or not) comments on an open peer review report penalise authors in the future?
    • Every paper gets negative peer-review comments, this doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad paper
    • Michael proposes an explicit "speculation" section for papers, where authors get free reign to basically say whatever they want

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Special Guest: Michael Eisen.

    Sponsored By:

    • Scite: Scite is a new tool that helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research. Instead of just a list of titles, Scite shows you an excerpt of text from each citing article so you can easily see what each citing paper says. As an Everything Hertz listener, you can get 30% off their premium package for 12 months, which gives you access to unlimited reports and reference checks. Use the coupon code "HERTZ" to claim this offer. This offer expires on Jan 1, 2021. Promo Code: HERTZ

    Support Everything Hertz


    122: Reoptimizing scientific publishing for the internet age (with Michael Eisen) Dec 21, 2020
    Show notes

    The internet should have transformed science publishing, but it didn't. We chat with Michael Eisen (Editor-in-Chief of eLife) about reoptimizing scientific publishing and peer review for the internet age.

    Here what we cover and some links:

    • How Michael co-founded PLOS
    • The book Dan mentioned on the history of the scientific journal
    • Why did eLife launch? What did it offer that other journals didn't?
    • Nature's recently proposed $11k article processing fee proposal
    • eLife's new "author-driven publishing" approach, in which all submitted papers have to be posted as preprints
    • Part two of our conversation will be released on January 4, 2021

    Other links

    • Dan [on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • James [on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • Everything Hertz [on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • Everything Hertz [on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)
    • Our merch store, with mugs, shirts, hoodies + more

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • One dollar a month: a twenty percent discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - Five dollars a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, December 21) "122: Reoptimizing scientific publishing for the internet age (with Michael Eisen)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/USYFC

    Special Guest: Michael Eisen.

    Sponsored By:

    • Scite: Scite is a new tool that helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research. Instead of just a list of titles, Scite shows you an excerpt of text from each citing article so you can easily see what each citing paper says. As an Everything Hertz listener, you can get 30% off their premium package for 12 months, which gives you access to unlimited reports and reference checks. Use the coupon code "HERTZ" to claim this offer. This offer expires on Jan 1, 2021. Promo Code: HERTZ

    Support Everything Hertz


    121: Transparent peer review Dec 07, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James discuss the pros and cons of transparent peer-review, in which peer review reports are published alongside manuscripts, as a keynote feature at the recent Munin Conference on scholarly publishing.

    Here's what they cover and some links:

    • Watch the video of this episode on the Everything Hertz YouTube page
    • What is transparent peer-review?
    • The permanancy of open peer review reports
    • CLOCKSS provides a sustainable dark archive to ensure the long-term survival of Web-based scholarly content
    • Open peer reviews provide additional info for historians
    • What changes when you know that your review is going to be public?
    • A Motte-and-bailey castle
    • An update and summary of the 450 movement
    • Involving patients/user representatives in the peer review and disemination process
    • The GRIM test
    • What about the publication of peer review reports for papers that are rejected?
    • The mega-analysis paper that Dan and James were co-authors on
    • Thank you to the organisers of the Munin conference for the invitation!

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • One dollar a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - Five dollars a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, December 7) "121: Transparent peer review", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/S2948

    Sponsored By:

    • Scite: Scite is a new tool that helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research. Instead of just a list of titles, Scite shows you an excerpt of text from each citing article so you can easily see what each citing paper says. As an Everything Hertz listener, you can get 30% off their premium package for 12 months, which gives you access to unlimited reports and reference checks. Use the coupon code "HERTZ" to claim this offer. This offer expires on Jan 1, 2021. Promo Code: HERTZ

    Support Everything Hertz


    120: How false beliefs spread in science (with Cailin O'Connor) Nov 16, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James chat with Cailin O'Connor (University of California, Irvine) about the how false beliefs spread in science and remedies for this issue

    Here's what they cover:

    • Why should psychologist scientists learn about the philosophy of science?
    • Cailin's new preprint on error propogation that she co-authrored
    • Boyd and Richerson's "Culture and the Evolutionary Process" book
    • Episode 91 with Kristin Sainani that discussed magnitude based inference
    • Christie Aschwanden on Magnitude Based Inference
    • The Misinformation age, co-authored by Cailin
    • Cailin's paper on the retraction of scientific papers
    • With Scite, you can be alterted whether a given paper has been retracted
    • Where should you start if you're interested in the philosophy of science?
    • Science as social knowledge, by Helen Longino
    • Cailin's on Twitter and you should also check out her website

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, November 16) "120: How false beliefs spread in science (with Cailin O'Connor", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6S8TB

    Special Guest: Cailin O'Connor.

    Sponsored By:

    • Scite: Scite is a new tool that helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research. Instead of just a list of titles, Scite shows you an excerpt of text from each citing article so you can easily see what each citing paper says. As an Everything Hertz listener, you can get 30% off their premium package for 12 months, which gives you access to unlimited reports and reference checks. Use the coupon code "HERTZ" to claim this offer. This offer expires on Jan 1, 2021. Promo Code: HERTZ

    Support Everything Hertz


    119: Rules of thumb Nov 02, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James discuss how rules of thumbs in science, such as those often applied to sample sizes and effect sizes, lead to mindless research evaluation.

    More info and links:

    • Is there any justifcation for holding back the public posting of data becuase you're not done with your analyses
    • We have a new episode partner, Scite!
    • Scite helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research
    • Get a 30% discount on a 12-month Premium Scite subscription. Use the coupon code: HERTZ (offer expires January 1, 2021)
    • Lake Wobegon, were all the children are above average
    • The tweet from Marco Altini about his desk-rejected manuscript
    • Sample size rules-of-thumb
    • Effect size rules-of-thumb
    • Dan's effect size distribution paper (Here's the preprint if you don't have access to the paywalled version)
    • We have a live episode scheduled for the 18 November (4pm CET) as part of the Munin Conference on Scholarly Publising

    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: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, November 2) "119: Rules of thumb", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/UMXR7

    Sponsored By:

    • Scite: Scite is a new tool that helps researchers quickly see how a research paper has been cited and if it has been supported or disputed by subsequent research. Instead of just a list of titles, Scite shows you an excerpt of text from each citing article so you can easily see what each citing paper says. As an Everything Hertz listener, you can get 30% off their premium package for 12 months, which gives you access to unlimited reports and reference checks. Use the coupon code "HERTZ" to claim this offer. This offer expires on Jan 1, 2021. Promo Code: HERTZ

    Support Everything Hertz


    118: Evidence-free gatekeeping Oct 19, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James answer audio listener questions on the worst review comments they've received (and how the responded), their thoughts on the current state of preprints, and how institutional prestige influences researcher evaluations.

    Other points and links:

    • Send in your audio question at our website
    • Listen to our episode with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti, on memes, TikTok, and science communication
    • The worst peer reviewers we have received
    • How do we respond to bad peer review comments
    • The Research Square preprint server
    • The current state of preprints
    • The 'readiness scale' paper at Nature Human Behavior
    • How the prestige of one's institition affects how they are assessed
    • The mathematician Grigori Perelman, who declined the Fields medal
    • The Laboratory Life book
    • Double-blinded peer-review

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation

    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, October 19) "118: Evidence-free gatekeeping", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RAVXK

    Support Everything Hertz


    117: How we peer-review papers Oct 05, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James choose a preprint and walk through how they would peer-review it. James also provides an update on his recent proposal that scientists should be paid for performing peer reviews for journals published by for-profit companies

    Specific links and topics:

    • An update on the 450 movement, which proposes that scientists should be paid for performing peer reviews for journals published by for-profit companies
    • You should follow Overly Honest Editor on Twitter
    • The Volkswagen fellowships
    • Emma Mills, from Lancaster University, asks us how we review papers
    • We review this paper: "Direct perception of other people’s heart rate"
    • The tweet from Maarten van Smeeden on data simulation

    Other links

    • [Dan on twitter](www.twitter.com/dsquintana)
    • [James on twitter](www.twitter.com/jamesheathers)
    • [Everything Hertz on twitter](www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast)
    • [Everything Hertz on Facebook](www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/)

    Music credits: [Lee Rosevere](freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/)

    Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!

    • $1 a month: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation
    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, October 5) "117: How we peer-review papers", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7JHFP

    Support Everything Hertz


    116: In my opinion Sep 21, 2020
    Show notes

    Dan and James chat about a recent twitter discussion on open science funding and the benefits of Editors sharing their opinions online. James also shares three project proposals that he thinks deserves funding, which Dan ranks.

    Other stuff...

    • The Twitter thread from Tage Rai on conflicts of interest in funding on science
    • The Raytheon Amphitheater at Northeastern University
    • How Nature Human Behavior evaluates your mansucripts, from episode 105.
    • Good and bad experiences with Frontiers journals
    • A contract for getting paid for reviews
    • Get access to our Patreon newsletter
    • The peer-review process at eLife
    • James' three grant proposal ideas
    • The taxi story [Story in Norwegian but Google translate does a good enough job]
    • PsycoPy
    • The eyetracker that's 100x cheaper than commercial eyetrackers
    • Ads in R package load up messages
    • Chat about this episode on the Git Gud Science Discord server

    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: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show

    - $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month

    Episode citation
    Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, September 21) "116: In my opinion", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WT46Z

    Support Everything Hertz


    Previous 1 6 7 8 9 10 20 Next

    Related Podcasts

    Invisibilia

    1

    Invisibilia Personal Journals
    Hidden Brain – Hidden Brain, Shankar Vedantam

    2

    Hidden Brain – Hidden Brain, Shankar Vedantam Science
    How To Do Everything

    3

    How To Do Everything Science
    Hidden Brain

    4

    Hidden Brain Games & Hobbies
    Something You Should Know

    5

    Something You Should Know Education
    Sword and Scale – Sword and Scale

    6

    Sword and Scale – Sword and Scale Alternative Health
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights