Everything Hertz

We have a wide-ranging chat with Saloni Dattani (Kings College London and University of Hong Kong) about the benefits of dividing scientific labor, the magazine she co-founded (Works in Progress) that shares novel ideas and stories of progress, and fighting online misinformation Here are some links and other stuff we cover Follow Saloni on Twitter: https://twitter.com/salonium Why Saloni started the Works in Progress (https://worksinprogress.co/) magazine Overleaf (overleaf.com), for writing papers in LaTeX How science will benefit from the division of labour Public writing vs. scientific writing Why has behavioral science not been very useful in curbing the pandemic? A paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378378220302929) suggested a link between digit ratio (2D:4D) and sex differences in COVID fatalities, and another paper (https://psyarxiv.com/ht74e/) debunking this claim A paper (https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-are-bald-men-at-greater-risk-of-severe-coronavi

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 (http://crystalprisonzone.blogspot.com/2021/01/i-tried-to-report-scientific-misconduct.html) 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/hertz

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 (https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/512536) that Eysenck co-authored, entitled “Coffee-Drinking and Personality as Factors in the Genesis of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease” THIS (https://youtu.be/TNScPDSRCzI) is Takeshi's Castle Other links

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?

The internet should have transformed science publishing, but it didn't. We chat with Michael Eisen (Editor-in-Chief of eLife (https://elifesciences.org/)) about reoptimizing scientific publishing and peer review for the internet age. Here what we cover and some links: How Michael co-founded PLOS (https://plos.org/) The book Dan mentioned on the history of the scientific journal (https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo28179042.html) 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 (https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64910), 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/everyt

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 (https://youtu.be/1Xp3IXaq970) on the Everything Hertz YouTube page What is transparent peer-review? The permanancy of open peer review reports CLOCKSS (https://clockss.org/) 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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_castle) An update and summary of the 450 movement (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd) Involving patients/user representatives in the peer review and disemination process The GRIM test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRIM_test) What about t

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 (https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo5970597.html) Episode 91 with Kristin Sainani (https://everythinghertz.com/91) that discussed magnitude based inference Christie Aschwanden (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-shoddy-statistics-found-a-home-in-sports-research/) on Magnitude Based Inference The Misinformation age (https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300234015/misinformation-age), co-authored by Cailin Cailin's paper on the retraction of scientific papers (http://cailinoconnor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Retractions_in_Epistemic_Networks-2.pdf) With Scite, you can be alterted whether a given paper has been retr

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 (https://scite.ai/)! 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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon), were all the children are above average The tweet from Marco Altini (https://twitter.com/altini_marco/status/1321432168216858625) about his desk-rejected manuscript Sample size rules-of-thumb Effect size rules-of-thumb Dan's effect size distribution paper (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27914167/) (Here's the preprint (https://osf.io/5y55v/) if you don't hav

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 (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) Listen to our episode with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti (https://everythinghertz.com/107), 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 (https://www.researchsquare.com/publishers/in-review) preprint server The current state of preprints The 'readiness scale' paper (https://rdcu.be/b8G3m) at Nature Human Behavior How the prestige of one's institition affects how they are assessed The mathematician Grigori Perelman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman), who declined the Fields medal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Medal) The Laboratory Life book (https

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 (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd), which proposes that scientists should be paid for performing peer reviews for journals published by for-profit companies You should follow Overly Honest Editor (https://twitter.com/Edit0r_At_Large) on Twitter The Volkswagen fellowships (https://www.volkswagenstiftung.de/en/funding/our-funding-portfolio-at-a-glance/freigeist-fellowships) Emma Mills (http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/emma-mills(edc1db6a-ca34-4086-b16f-95dd24534887).html), from Lancaster University, asks us how we review papers We review this paper: "Direct perception of other people’s heart rate (https://psyarxiv.com/7f9pq)" The tweet from Maarten van Smeeden (https://twit

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 (https://twitter.com/tage_rai/status/1304985745157914624?s=20) from Tage Rai on conflicts of interest in funding on science The Raytheon Amphitheater (http://www.northeastern.edu/egan/raytheon.html) at Northeastern University How Nature Human Behavior evaluates your mansucripts (https://rdcu.be/b7otB), from episode 105 (https://everythinghertz.com/105). Good and bad experiences with Frontiers journals A contract (https://osf.io/5ey8g/) for getting paid for reviews Get access to our Patreon newsletter (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) The peer-review process (https://reviewer.elifesciences.org/reviewer-guide/review-process) at eLife James' three grant proposal ideas The taxi story (https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/21LV4B/topp-professor-tok-ta

We discuss James' recent proposal that scientists should be paid for performing peer review for journals published by for-profit companies—$450, to be precise. Dan also puts forward three meta-science projects that he thinks are worth funding. More details * James' tweet (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1301533455520608256?s=20) proposing peer review should be compensated * Since recording this episode, James has set up the @450Movement twitter account (https://twitter.com/450movement) * Also see James' blog post (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd) * The Collabra Psychology (https://www.collabra.org/) journal * Did the folks that co-authored the "redefine statistical sigificance (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0189-z)" paper actually go on to follow their own recommendations? * Would high financial compensation of people on job search panels lead to better quality hires? * A tool that would automatically scrape the email addresses the of authors of papers y

We chat with Jess Wade (Imperial College London) about diversity issues in science, including her work increasing the profile of underrepresented scientists on Wikipedia and on getting more young women into science. Here's what we cover: Jess' Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jess_Wade) Inferior (https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/553867/inferior-by-angela-saini/), by Angela Saini What's involved when making a bio page? The "notability" criteria for adding a scientist's bio on wikipedia Listen to Wikipedia grow on Hatnote (http://listen.hatnote.com/) Don't write your own page, even under a psuedonym. What's the best way to get girls into science and engineering? The lack of diversity in science award winners Follow Jess on Twitter (https://twitter.com/jesswade)! The opportunuties provided by social media Using social media to scope out new labs Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twi

Dan and James discuss whether scientists should spend more time creating and editing Wikipedia articles. They also chat about how they read scientific articles and the heuristics they use to help decide whether a paper's worth their time. Here are some more details and links: Send in your audio questions here (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) How does James read so much and what tips do Dan and James have for reading papers? The Stork (https://www.storkapp.me/) paper recommendation service How James and Dan rapidly judge whether a paper is worth the time to read The benefit of a memorable paper title Peer review forces you to read papers carefully James screens a few papers for further reading on the spot based on their titles What is the role of Wikipedia in science communication and education? Jess Wade's (https://twitter.com/jesswade) project advocating for better representation of female scientists on Wikipedia Wikipedia articles vs. textbooks Do we even need textbooks in psychology? The Biolog

Dan and James chat about James' new industry job, why he quit academia, the biggest differences between academia and industry, and why it's crucial for early career researchers to have a plan B. James new industry job James' medium blog post (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/i-quit-be062295f638) Having a plan B (and plan C) in academia Using consulting a bridge to a full-time industry job How to get an industry job The role of grant success in academia More research is now open access than not Get 20% off our merch (https://teespring.com/en-GB/stores/everything-hertz-podcast) by using the promo code "AUGUST" It's now easier to not be employed in academia but still contribute to academia The NBA bubble (https://slate.com/culture/2020/07/nba-bubble-coronavirus-orlando-life.html) The Oura ring (https://ouraring.com/) Differences in work/life balance between academia and industry Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on t

We chat with Chris Jackson (Imperial College, London) about the "Matthew Effect" in academia, how we can improve work/balance, and whether we should stop citing shitty people. Here's more stuff we cover: Chris climbed the world's most dangerous volcano for a BBC show (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09hlzbb) Chris' email signature Having a code of conduct for your lab Work/life balance in academia Are things worse in academia compared to other desk jobs? How Chris co-founded "EarthArxiv", a preprint server for the earth sciences The point/counterpoint article format (here (https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00604.2017) is an example) Open science in the geosciences Requesting data from authors Follow Chris on Twitter (https://twitter.com/seis_matters) Issues with bibliometrics Should we stop citing shitty people? The long wait to get your work expenses reiumbursed Other links - Dan on twitter (https://twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on [twitter]((https://twitter.com/jamesheather

We answer a listener question on identifying red flags for errors in papers. Is there a way to better equip peer-reviewers for spotting errors and suspicious data? More details and links... We answer an audio question from Kim Mitchell (https://twitter.com/academicswrite). Submit your audio questions via our website (https://everythinghertz.com/audio-question) Nick Brown's blogpost (http://steamtraen.blogspot.com/2020/04/some-issues-in-recent-gaming-research.html) on the video game "study" We ran a live survey using Prolific! Go to prolific.com/everythinghertz to get $50 worth of credit for $1 Spotting unlikely data in meta-analysis How can make reviewers better at detecting errors in papers? Using a "Red team (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_team)" to pull apart your papers What do lay people think really happens in 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) - Every

Dan and James recorded a live episode on open publishing as part of the Open Publishing Fest. They also ran a survey (from start to finish) during the course of the episode on the public's perception of open scientific publishing and discuss the results. Here are more stuff they covered, plus links! The Open Publishing Fest (https://openpublishingfest.org/) We collected data LIVE thanks to Prolific! Go to prolific.co/everythinghertz to get $50 worth of credit for just $1 How to build a low cost book scanner (https://goinggnu.wordpress.com/2020/04/20/making-of-kaniyam-scanbox-diy-scanner/) A prepreprint repository (https://info.africarxiv.org/) for African researchers What is the role of "niche" preprint servers vs. general preprint servers? Is there a discoverability crisis? Detailed literature search is HARD The Octopus publishing platform (https://app.science-octopus.org/) We discuss the results of our real-time survey on the public's perception of open publishing Some university have set up a 'data office'

We discuss the recent claim that screen time is more harmful than heroin and whether psychological science is a crisis-ready discipline Other stuff we cover: Dan's adjustment to a second kid The "Psychological science is not yet a crisis ready discipline (https://psyarxiv.com/whds4/)" preprint The Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/rickcarlsson/status/1260661034580242432?s=21) from Rickard Carlsson There is a contimuum of evidence for psychological science's use in a crisis Belgian Officials: To Save Country's Potato Industry, Belgians Must Eat More Fries (https://time.com/5829078/belgium-coronavirus-potatoes-frites/) Our episode with Amy Orben Screen time has apparenty worse effects than heroin use on wellbeing (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0839-4?draft=collection) Are we better off without press releases? 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

We chat with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti (Chapman University, USA) about the role of memes and emerging social media in communicating science and statistics. Stuff we cover + links: Why Chelsea uses memes and social media for science communication Chelsea's use of TikTok Chelsea's TikTok profile (https://tiktok.com/@chelseaparlettpelleriti) Chelsea's Instagram profile (https://instagram.com/chelseaparlett/) How much time should you spend on science communication vs. science research? What Twitch is and how this can be used by academics Chelsea's Twitch profile (https://twitch.tv/cmparlettpelleriti) Dan's livestream of him writing a paper (https://youtu.be/mZkLlT0Jz7M) Chelsea's profile on YouTube (https://youtube.com/channel/UCp2HgyofhnTJ-uxdhGNEHCg) Custom Stats themed Quiplash Game Codes: (JNL-HWDN) (DJM-ZDES) Is Instagram worth it for Science communication? NeuralNetMemes: https://instagram.com/neuralnetmemes/?hl=en Have statistical software packages become too easy? Chelsea's statisical consultancy servic