We did this eight (!?) years ago everythinghertz.com/44

Nope we're not kiwis, we're Aussies and OPTIMISTIC

193: The pop-up journal everythinghertz.com/193 We chat about a a new 'pop-up journal' concept for addressing specific research questions. We also answer a listener question from a journal grammar editor and discuss a recent PNAS paper on paper mills

192: Outsourcing in academia everythinghertz.com/192 We answer listener questions on outsourcing in academia and differences in research culture between academic and commercial institutions

This episode auto-played after an @ologies.bsky.social episode and now I’m very excited about @jamesheathers.bsky.social’s new Medical Evidence Project! Too bad metascience doesn’t have an -ology name.

Dug back through the archives and found our first pandemic episode, which we released on March 16th 2020 everythinghertz.com/104

Here is an interesting project, which - if it finds its way to the right people - has the potential to legitimately help improve public health. The approach to broadcasting the outcomes sounds a bit scary, but ultimately I think it's probably right 1/ #ScientificPublishing #ResearchIntegrity

191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines everythinghertz.com/191 In which we discuss whether scientists critiquing science reduces public trust in science

191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines everythinghertz.com/191 @dsquintana.bsky.social and @jamesheathers.bsky.social discuss James' new 'Medical Evidence Project', whose goal is to find questionable medical evidence that is contaminating treatment guidelines

Oh wow. Brazil, I see you trying out there. Worth some @everythinghertz.com time I feel. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

Studies about paying peer reviewers!

190: What happens when you pay reviewers? everythinghertz.com/190 We chat about two new studies that evaluated the impact of paying reviewers on peer review speed and quality. One of these studies had such massive effects on peer-review speed we had to double-take the figure.

Great to catch up with @wiringthebrain.bsky.social during his visit to Oslo! I haven’t managed to meet many @everythinghertz.com guests in person but it’s always nice when this can happen

189: Crit me baby, one more time everythinghertz.com/189 We discuss a recent piece that proposes a *post-publication* peer review process, which is triggered by citation counts. We also cover how an altmetric trigger could be used for a more immediate post-publication critique

Friends, I have written you a book on forensic metascience. It is free. You can have it. Happy St. Valentine's Day. If you wish to give me a gift back, you can use it to cause trouble - the greatest gift of all. open.substack.com/pub/jamescla...

We just updated our handle to @everythinghertz.com. Thanks to @ikashnitsky.phd for the suggestion!

Strong start to 2025 from Everything Hertz #ScientificPublishing though did feel attacked towards the end there (is difficult if you're catty and occasionally mean)

Our patrons get access to our bonus episodes (74 to date!), in which we share the bits that don't make our main episodes. In our latest bonus ep, we talk about how we edit episodes and the time James went to a hair salon because his hair was too long for a barber www.patreon.com/posts/bonus-...

We just released a new @hertzpodcast.bsky.social episode, in which we discuss a recent editorial on double-blind peer reviews. The editorial also covers the benefits of open peer review reports, which some people are against for what I think are unconvincing reasons everythinghertz.com/188

Make 👏 research 👏 data 👏 machine👏 readable everythinghertz.com/188

188: Double-blind peer review vs. scientific integrity everythinghertz.com/188 Here we discuss a recent editorial which argues that double-blind peer review is detrimental to scientific integrity and proposes some suggestions for improving peer review. Here's how the article begins ⬇️

This @hertzpodcast.bsky.social podcast is a great listen for those considering leaving academia. Recognizing the skills you've built up is key everythinghertz.com/112

Open University Press have kindly allowed me to share this chapter as a preprint: it outlines a recent history of the replication crisis & intertwined explanations. 🌎📖 osf.io/preprints/ps... ✨🚨 Interested in the full book? Code OPENUP20 gives 20% off the RRP: www.mheducation.co.uk/a-student-s-...

Yeah, we're doing this again.

How would you respond if an undergrad psychology student asked you, "How can I know if a paper is a *good* paper?" everythinghertz.com/186

In our latest episode we put out the call for good write-ups on the history of the replication crisis. @drcpennington.bsky.social has delivered as this is covered in her book "A Student's Guide to Open Science: Using the Replication Crisis to Reform Psychology" www.mheducation.co.uk/a-student-s-...

Hello new followers! Have a listen to our episode with @cfchabris.bsky.social and @profsimons.bsky.social, in which we chat about the fate of the gorilla costume, among other stuff like the science of cons everythinghertz.com/171

I’m listening to this and recalling that I wasn’t even vaguely *aware* of any crisis until around 2015 when I moved to my current office in a hallway with 4 social psychologists and they filled me in. In developmental/clinical, this just wasn’t on anyone’s radar.

PhDs in Australia are a little different... everythinghertz.com/187

187: What started the replication crisis era? everythinghertz.com/187 In our latest full episode, we discuss the events that kicked off the replication crisis era

We just released our latest BONUS episode [21 mins] on academic hoaxes www.patreon.com/posts/bonus-...

We're recording a episode later today, so if you've got a question you can record it here and we'll play it on the show everythinghertz.com/audio-question

It’s an Everything Hertz guest starter pack!

It so happens that @jamesheathers.bsky.social and @dsquintana.bsky.social have a recent episode of HertzPodcast where they play a game called "Journal or Not Journal" re MDPI titles. Around 33 min in here: everythinghertz.com/186

A well deserved award! Listen to Elisabeth’s story in episode 74 everythinghertz.com/74

Which ranking is more meaningless? University rankings or journal impact factor rankings? everythinghertz.com/186

So @jamesheathers.bsky.social did much better on this quiz compared to our “Pokémon or Cholesterol medication” quiz in episode 22

186: Evaluating journal quality everythinghertz.com/186 We chat about a Nordic approach for evaluating the journal quality, where expert panels rank journals, and how we should be teaching the evaluation of journal and article quality to undergraduate psychology students

185: The Retraction everythinghertz.com/185 We discuss the recent retraction of a paper that reported the effects of rigour-enhancing practices on replicability. We also cover James' new estimate that 1 out of 7 scientific papers are fake.

Last night @jamesheathers.bsky.social and I recorded a @hertzpodcast.bsky.social episode. Because nothing really has been happening over the past few days in the biobehavioral sciences we spent an hour talking about our love of the “Redwall” book series. We are now “Everything Redwall”

184: A race to the bottom everythinghertz.com/184 Open access articles have democratized the availability of science, but are author-paid publication fees undermining the quality of science? We discuss a recent preprint from Thomas Morgan and @psmaldino.bsky.social - osf.io/preprints/os...

Anyone have any examples of courses using our episodes as readings (or “listenings”)? Bonus points if you can link to a syllabus!

A huge thanks to all our Patreon supporters 🙌 Podcasting isn’t free, so your support helps us make more episodes. Patreon supporters get access to a few extra goodies to say thanks, including a monthly bonus episode and access to almost 70 past bonus episodes www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast

"I..made 41 editorial decisions..requesting that the authors provide raw data. Surprisingly, among those 41 manuscripts, 21 were withdrawn without providing raw data [and] I rejected 19 out of the remaining 20..because of insufficient raw data." molecularbrain.biomedcentral.com/articles/10....

183: Too beautiful to be true everythinghertz.com/183 We discuss a paper describing a journal editor's efforts to receive data from authors with papers under consideration in their journal that reported results that seemed a little *too* beautiful to be true

182: What practices should the behavioural sciences borrow from other research fields? everythinghertz.com/182 We cover meta-analysis pre-registration (medicine), electronic lab management software (biology), case studies (medicine), clear writing (philosophy), plus more!

180: Consortium peer reviews everythinghertz.com/180 We discuss why innovation in scientific publishing is so hard, an emerging consortium peer review model, and a recent replication attempt of the 'refilling soup bowl' study

179: Discovery vs. maintenance everythinghertz.com/179 We answer a listener's audio question on open source tools, discuss how research often neglects the the long-term maintenance of scientific resources, chat about the Gates' Foundation new OA policy + more!

178: Alerting researchers about retractions everythinghertz.com/178 Researchers who have cited a paper that was *later* retracted have no way of learning this, unless they happen to see the retraction notice. We discuss a new project that aims to fix this + MORE!

I've been thinking today about "everything gets published eventually" mantra, when I heard exactly that on @hertzpodcast.bsky.social (for patrons, so you know, consider supporting or subscribing?). It struck me that it's not just that everything gets published #ScientificPublishing #AcademicSky 1/