Everything Hertz

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

About the show

A podcast by scientists, for scientists. Methodology, scientific life, and bad language. Co-hosted by Dr. Dan Quintana (University of Oslo) and Dr. James Heathers (Northeastern University)

Everything Hertz on social media


  • 102: Master of none

    February 17th, 2020  |  1 hr 4 mins

    Should research scientists build their knowledge and skillset broadly at the risk of being a master of none? Dan and James discuss this, along with a recent editorial on the use of Twitter in academia.

  • 101: Punishing research misconduct

    February 3rd, 2020  |  59 mins 15 secs

    Dan and James cover a new paper which discusses whether research misconduct should be criminalised. If so, where do we draw the line and who should investigate these cases?

  • 100: Hundredth episode live special (with Daniel Lakens, Amy Orben, and Chris Chambers)

    January 27th, 2020  |  1 hr 50 mins

    To celebrate our 100th episode, which we video-streamed live, Dan and James were joined by three special guests: Daniel Lakens, Amy Orben, and Chris Chambers.

  • 99: Science advocacy

    January 6th, 2020  |  49 mins 36 secs

    Dan and James answer a listener question on science advocacy. Is this an activity that all scientists should do, and if so, how much advocacy work should we be doing?

  • 98: Episode titles are redundant, at best (with Sophia Crüwell)

    December 16th, 2019  |  59 mins 28 secs

    We chat with Sophia Crüwell (Meta-Research Innovation Center Berlin) about pre-registration and her recent work introducing pre-registration templates for cognitive modelling research.

  • 97: Slow science

    December 2nd, 2019  |  1 hr 44 secs

    Dan and James discuss the concept of "slow science", which has been proposed in order to improve the quality of scientific research and create a more sustainable work environment.

  • 96: The chaotic state of doctoral research

    November 18th, 2019  |  47 mins 49 secs

    Dan and James discuss the results of this year's Nature survey of PhD students. Despite a majority of students reporting general satisfaction with their decision to undertake a PhD, many described a sense of uncertainty, harassment in the lab, and gruelling work hours.

  • 95: All good presentations are alike; each bad presentation is bad in its own way

    November 4th, 2019  |  1 hr 3 mins

    Dan and James discuss why academia tolerates bad presentations and the strange distrust of polished presentations.

  • 94: Predicting the replicability of research

    October 21st, 2019  |  58 mins 10 secs

    Dan and James chat with Fiona Fidler (University of Melbourne), who is leading the repliCATS project, which aims to develop accurate techniques to elicit estimates of the replicability of research.

  • 93: Double-blind peer review vs. open science

    October 7th, 2019  |  54 mins 46 secs

    Dan and James answer a listener question on how to navigate open science practices, such as preprints and open code repositories, in light of double-blind reviews.

  • 92: Chaos in the brickyard

    September 16th, 2019  |  1 hr 13 mins

    Dan and James discuss the role of Google Scholar in citation patterns and whether we should limit academics to only publishing two papers a year.

  • 91: Shifting the goalposts in statistics (with Kristin Sainani)

    September 2nd, 2019  |  1 hr 3 mins

    We chat with Kristin Sainani (Stanford University) about a popular statistical method in sports medicine research (magnitude based inference), which has been banned by some journals, but continues to thrive in some pockets of scholarship. We also discuss the role of statistical inference in the current replication crisis.