Everything Hertz

107: Memes, TikTok, and science communication (with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti)

May 4th, 2020 | 1 hr 5 mins

We chat with Chelsea Parlett-Pelleriti (Chapman University, USA) about the role of memes and emerging social media in communicating science and statistics.

106: Science on the run

April 20th, 2020 | 50 mins 12 secs

Dan and James discuss whether getting rapid outcomes to address the pandemic is worth the increased risk of mistakes—how can scholars perform research that is both swift and accurate?

105: Tell it like it is (with Marike Schiffer)

April 6th, 2020 | 57 mins 45 secs

We chat with Marike Schiffer, who is a Senior Editor at Nature Human Behavior, about her journal's push to increase reproducibility in the behavioral sciences. She also shares how her team evaluates manuscripts and some common misunderstandings about scientific publishing.

104: Now we'll discover which meetings could've been emails

March 16th, 2020 | 1 hr 3 mins

Dan and James discuss the COVID-19 pandemic and how it's impacting academia

103: Swiping right

March 2nd, 2020 | 1 hr 17 mins

Dan and James discuss rejection in academia and emerging science communication platforms

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.

Episode Archive