Everything Hertz

Everything Hertz

everythinghertz.com
A podcast by scientists, for scientists. Methodology, scientific life, and bad language.


88: The pomodoro episode
Jul 15 • 60 min
Dan and James apply the pomodoro principle by tackling four topics within a strict ten-minute time limit each: James' new error detection tool, academic dress codes, the "back in my day…" defence for QRPs, and p-slacking. Here are links and details… James…
87: Improving the scientific poster (with Mike Morrison)
Jul 1 • 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…
86: Should I stay or should I go?
Jun 17 • 64 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. Other stuff they cover: We don’t like cricket, oh no, we love it James is bad at tribalism We…
85: GWAS big teeth you have, grandmother (with Kevin Mitchell)
Jun 3 • 83 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". Other stuff we cover: Kevin's…
84: A GPS in the Garden of Forking Paths (with Amy Orben)
May 21 • 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…
83: Back to our dirty unwashed roots
May 8 • 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. Stuff they cover and links to…
82: More janitors and fewer architects
Apr 15 • 71 min
We answer a listener question on the possible negative consequences of the open science movement—are things moving too quickly? Links and things we discuss in the episode: We have a new logo, if you haven't already noticed… Contact us via our website…
81: Too Young To Know, Too Old To Care
Apr 1 • 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. Show details: Our first audio question…
80: Cites are not endorsements (with Sean Rife)
Mar 17 • 51 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. Here's what we cover and links for a few things we mention What is…
79: Clinical trial reporting (with Henry Drysdale)
Mar 3 • 55 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…
78: Large-scale collaborative science (with Lisa DeBruine)
Feb 17 • 58 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. Discussion points and links galore: Deborah Apthorp's tweet on…
77: Promiscuous expertise
Feb 4 • 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 Here's what they cover… The podcast will…
76: Open peer review
Jan 21 • 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…
75: Overlay journals (with Daniele Marinazzo)
Jan 7 • 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. An overlay journal is organised a set of manuscripts that…
74: Seeing double (with Elisabeth Bik)
Dec 19, 2018 • 51 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. More info on what they cover: How…
73: Update your damn syllabus
Dec 3, 2018 • 61 min
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…
72: Anonymity in scientific publishing
Nov 16, 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. Here's the episode lowdown James…
71: Moving for your job
Nov 5, 2018 • 54 min
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…
70: Doubling-blinding dog balls
Oct 15, 2018 • 66 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…
69: Open science tools (with Brian Nosek)
Oct 9, 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…
68: Friends don’t let friends believe in impact factors (with Nathan Hall)
Sep 3, 2018 • 74 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…
67: Shit Academics Say (with Nathan Hall)
Aug 20, 2018 • 63 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. Here’s what we…
66: Ideal worlds vs grim truths
Aug 5, 2018 • 54 min
Dan and James answer listener questions on tips for starting your PhD and the role of statistics in exploratory research. Other stuff they cover: James new paper on people that voluntarily give themselves goosebumps Dan’s new podcast: Physiology and…
65: Blockchain and open science (with Jon Brock)
Jul 16, 2018 • 54 min
Dan and James chat with Jon Brock (Cognitive scientist at Frankl) about the use of blockchain technology for open science. Here's what they cover: What is the blockchain? Why Jon made the jump from academia to Frankl A cryptocurrency for open science What…
64: Salami slicing
Jul 1, 2018 • 61 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. Here's what they cover: What is the SIPS conference? [0:24] A SIPS proposal for Google scholar to…
63: Science journalism (with Brian Resnick)
Jun 18, 2018 • 60 min
Dan and James chat about science journalism with Brian Resnick (@b_resnick), who is a science reporter at Vox.com. Here’s what they cover: Should scientists be worried that their work will be misrepresented when talking to the media? [0:58] How Brian…
62: Adopting open science practices (with Dorothy Bishop)
Jun 4, 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. Here are some highlights from the show: Why Dorothy starting adopting open science practices…
61: Performance enhancing thugs (with Greg Nuckols)
May 21, 2018 • 26 min
Dan and James chat with Greg Nuckols, who is grad student in exercise physiology, strength coach, and writer at strongerbyscience.com What they cover in this episode: Why Greg blogs his papers before preprints How Greg combines his business with his grad…
60: This is more of a comment than a question
May 8, 2018 • 67 min
Dan and James answer listener questions on academic conferences, getting abreast of the literature, and conflicts of interest. Here are more details of what's on this episode: How question times during conference seminars are useless Choosing which…
59: Rethinking the scientific journal (with Rickard Carlsson)
Apr 16, 2018 • 62 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? Dan and James are joined by Rickard Carlsson…
58: Lessons from podcasting (with Simine Vazire)
Apr 2, 2018 • 61 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…
57: Radical Transparency (with Rebecca Willén)
Mar 15, 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. Here's what they cover: Rebecca…
56: Registered reports (with Chris Chambers)
Feb 2, 2018 • 53 min
Dan and James are joined by Chris Chambers (Cardiff University) to discuss the Registered Reports format. Here’s an overview of what they covered: What is a registered report and why should we implement them? [1:47] The impact of conscious and unconscious…
55: The proposal to redefine clinical trials
Jan 18, 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. Here’s the new definition: “A research study in which one or more human subjects are…
54: Cuckoo Science
Dec 15, 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. Stuff they cover: How James got into finding and exposing inconsistent results The critiques of…
53: Skin in the game
Nov 17, 2017 • 66 min
Dan and James discuss whether you need to have “skin in the game” to critique research. Here's what else they cover in the episode: Should scientists be required to communicate their science? If your research is likely to be misinterpreted try and get out…
52: Give p’s a chance (with Daniel Lakens)
Oct 20, 2017 • 62 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. Highlights: Why did Daniel write this paper? Turning away from mindless statistics Incremental vs.…
51: Preprints (with Jessica Polka)
Oct 6, 2017 • 56 min
In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Jessica Polka, Director of ASAPbio, to chat about preprints. Highlights: What is ASAPbio? Differences between the publication processes in the biological sciences vs. the biomedical sciences Common concerns…
50: Special 50th episode (LIVE)
Sep 14, 2017 • 99 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. BONUS: You can also watch the video of…
49: War and p’s
Jul 31, 2017 • 55 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. Stuff they cover: A summary of the paper and…
48: Breaking up with the impact factor (with Jason Hoyt)
Jul 21, 2017 • 53 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. Here's some of what they cover: PeerJ’s model and how it got started What goes into running a journal Impact…
47: Truth bombs from a methodological freedom fighter (with Anne Scheel)
Jul 7, 2017 • 69 min
In this episode, Dan and James are joined by Anne Scheel (LMU Munich) to discuss open science advocacy. Highlights: How Anne became an open science advocate Open science is better science Methodological terrorists/freedom fighters The time Anne stood up…
46: Statistical literacy (with Andy Field)
Jun 23, 2017 • 79 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. Highlights: The story behind Andy’s new book SPSS and Bayesian statistics Andy…
45: Conferences and conspiracy theories
Jun 2, 2017 • 61 min
It’s conference season so in this episode Dan and James discuss the ins and outs of scientific conferences. Here’s what they cover: Research parasite award How much do you save when you don’t run an fMRI study They come up with an even better name than…
44: Who’s afraid of the New Bad People? (with Nick Brown)
May 19, 2017 • 68 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,…
43: Death, taxes, and publication bias in meta-analysis (with Daniel Lakens)
May 5, 2017 • 62 min
Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) joins James and Dan to talk meta-analysis. Here’s what they cover: Daniel’s opinion on the current state of meta-analysis The benefit of reporting guidelines (even though hardly anyone actually follows…
42: Some of my best friends are Bayesians (with Daniel Lakens)
Apr 21, 2017 • 67 min
Daniel Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology) drops in to talk statistical inference with James and Dan. Here’s what they cover: How did Daniel get into statistical inference? Are we overdoing the Frequentist vs. Bayes debate? What situations better…
41: Objecting to published research (with William Gunn)
Apr 7, 2017 • 67 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. They also cover: What differentiates an analytics company from a publishing…
40: Meta-research (with Michèle Nuijten)
Mar 24, 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. They also cover: How Michèle dealt with statcheck…
39: Academic hipsters
Mar 10, 2017 • 54 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…
38: Work/life balance - Part 2
Feb 24, 2017 • 62 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. Some of the topics covered: Feedback from our last episode Why the…
37: Work/life balance in academia
Feb 17, 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? Some of the topics covered: An update on "the postdoc that didn't say…
36: Statistical inconsistencies in published research
Jan 27, 2017 • 50 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…
35: A manifesto for reproducible science
Jan 20, 2017 • 50 min
Dan and James discuss a new paper in the inaugural issue of Nature Human Behaviour, "A manifesto for reproducible science". Some of the topics covered: What's a manfesto for reproducibility doing in a Nature group journal? Registered reports The…
34: E-health (with Robin Kok)
Dec 22, 2016 • 60 min
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.…
33: Zombie theories
Dec 16, 2016 • 43 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? Some of the topics covered: Why do some ideas live on? Zombie theories in…
32: Can worrying about getting sick make you sicker?
Dec 1, 2016 • 43 min
Dan and James discuss a new population study that linked health anxiety data with future heart disease. Some of the topics covered: Web MD and health anxiety How would healthy anxiety contribute to heart disease? A summary of the study Ischemic heart…
31: Discover your psychiatric risk with this one weird trick
Nov 16, 2016 • 54 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. Some of the topics covered: How did these authors get…
30: Authorship
Nov 2, 2016 • 49 min
Dan and James discuss authorship in the biomedical sciencesSupport Everything Hertz
29: Learning new skills
Oct 16, 2016 • 48 min
Dan and James talk about how they learn new things. Some of the topics discussed: Internet memes Consolidating old ideas rather than learning new ones Why learn a new skill when you just get someone else to do it? A lesson of not having a good…
28: Positive developments in biomedical science
Sep 30, 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. Some of the topics…
27: Complaints and grievances
Sep 23, 2016 • 52 min
Dan and James discuss complaints and grievances. Stay tuned for part 2 where things get positive. Some of the topics discussed: Conflicts of interest Criticism in psychology Why does there seem to be so much bad blood in psychology? Retracted papers:…
26: Interpreting effect sizes
Sep 9, 2016 • 45 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…
25: Misunderstanding p-values
Aug 27, 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. Some of the topics discussed: Common p-value…
24: Incentive structures in science
Aug 17, 2016 • 60 min
Science funding has a series of built in incentive structures, but what sort of science does this produce? Some of the topics discussed: Feedback from our 'Public health and Pokemon' episode (#22) Incentive structures in science What we should be doing in…
23: Serious academics
Aug 11, 2016 • 52 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. Some of the topics discussed: James and Dan share their…
22: Pokemon and public health
Aug 3, 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? Some of the topics discussed: James plays "Pokemon or Cholesterol medication?" Dan tries to…
21: This is your brain on steroids
Jul 22, 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? Dan and James discuss an interesting new paper that compared brain structure in long-term steroid users and non-using…
20: Sample sizes in psychology studies
Jul 13, 2016 • 61 min
Can psychologists learn more by studying fewer people? Some of the topics discussed: Brexit and science Can the UK take the 'Norway' option? Horizon 2020 The impact on personnel and research training Italian coffee Listener feedback We're sorry for the…
19: Let us spray: oxytocin and spirituality
Jul 6, 2016 • 47 min
Dan and James discuss a recent paper on intranasal oxytocin and spirituality Some of the topics discussed: A summary of a recent paper on oxytocin and spirituality Why within-subject designs are a better choice for oxytocin research The physiology of…
18: Data sharing
Jun 29, 2016 • 51 min
Withholding data: bad science or scientific misconduct? Some of the topics discussed: Dan raises privacy issues surrounding sharing data What are the limits of AI to identify people from 'un-identifiable' data? The new age of sharing data What grinds…
17: Journals: Do we need them?
Jun 22, 2016 • 51 min
Do we really need scientific journals? Some of the topics discussed: James trolling predatory journals with jibberish papers on the 'DONG' effect How do these spammy journal invitation emails actually work? Formal journals vs. preprint servers The shift…
16: What makes a good psych study?
Jun 15, 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. Some of the topics discussed: When’s the last time you saw a psych study that only…
15: Software and coding
Jun 8, 2016 • 45 min
Dan and James discuss software and coding, including the tools they use Links (lots this week) Introduction to Python course - http://python.swaroopch.com //// R markdown - http://rmarkdown.rstudio.com //// GraphPad - http://www.graphpad.com //// JASP -…
14: Science communication
Jun 2, 2016 • 32 min
Dan and James discuss public engagement, science communication, and the internet outrage machine. Links: James' GRIM pre-print https://peerj.com/preprints/2064v1/ Dan's meta-analysis paper…
13: Academic horror stories
May 26, 2016 • 52 min
Dan and James discuss a few academic horror stories sent in by their listeners. Links: The Gawker story on leaving academia http://gawker.com/i-left-my-ph-d-program-in-chemistry-a-few-years-back-wh-1774236393 Equator network http://www.equator-network.org…
12: Reporting heart rate variability studies
May 21, 2016 • 59 min
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…
11: The placebo effect
May 10, 2016 • 43 min
In this episode, James and Dan discuss issues surrounding the placebo effect. Links: Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account https://www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast Dan's other podcast…
10: Failure
May 4, 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? Support Everything Hertz
9: What happens if your research is wrong?
Apr 28, 2016 • 51 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.…
8: The PhD to Postdoc transition
Apr 20, 2016 • 50 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. Links: Propel Careers -…
Episode 7: 7: The writing process
Apr 15, 2016 • 49 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. Links: The Conversation https://theconversation.com BreakTime app http://breaktimeapp.com Tomato timer…
6: The research pipeline - getting from idea to publication
Apr 7, 2016 • 53 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…
5: Do you even replicate?
Mar 30, 2016 • 45 min
In this episode, James and Dan talk about replication in science, self-control, and the file-drawer problem in oxytocin research. Links: Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/ Twitter account…
4: Meta-analysis or mega-silliness?
Mar 22, 2016 • 39 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.,…
3: Scientific publishing
Mar 16, 2016 • 49 min
Dan and James talk about Scihub and open access publishing.Support Everything Hertz
2: Nutrition and Psychiatry
Mar 9, 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.Support Everything Hertz
1: So you want to measure heart rate variability…
Mar 2, 2016 • 43 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.Support Everything Hertz