About this Episode
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
- How does James read so much and what tips do Dan and James have for reading papers?
- The Stork 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 project advocating for better representation of female scientists on Wikipedia
- Wikipedia articles vs. textbooks
- Do we even need textbooks in psychology?
- The Biological Psychology wiki textbook is a ghost town
- Using the R bookdown package for online books
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 or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
- $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the $1 tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes)
Episode citation
Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, August 3) "113: Citation needed", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3D6YJ