About this Episode
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
- Listen to our episode with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti, 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 preprint server
- The current state of preprints
- The 'readiness scale' paper at Nature Human Behavior
- How the prestige of one's institition affects how they are assessed
- The mathematician Grigori Perelman, who declined the Fields medal
- The Laboratory Life book
- Double-blinded 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)
- [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: 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, a monthly newsletter, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show
- $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month
Episode citation
Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2020, October 19) "118: Evidence-free gatekeeping", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RAVXK
Support Everything Hertz