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


  • 81: Too Young To Know, Too Old To Care

    April 1st, 2019  |  56 mins 9 secs

    We answer our first audio question, on whether academia is too broken to fix, and a second question on whether we’ve ever worried about the possible repercussions of our public critiques and commentary on academia

  • 80: Cites are not endorsements (with Sean Rife)

    March 17th, 2019  |  51 mins 33 secs

    We chat with Sean Rife, who the co-founder of scite.ai, a start-up that combines natural language processing with a network of experts to evaluate the veracity of scientific work

  • 79: Clinical trial reporting (with Henry Drysdale)

    March 3rd, 2019  |  55 mins 47 secs

    We chat with Henry Drysdale (University of Oxford), co-founder of the COMPare trials project, which compared clinical trial registrations with reported outcomes in five top medical journals and qualitatively analysed the responses to critical correspondence.

  • 78: Large-scale collaborative science (with Lisa DeBruine)

    February 17th, 2019  |  58 mins 38 secs
    psychology, r stats, registered reports, reproducibility, research, science, statistics

    We chat with Lisa DeBruine (University of Glasgow) about large-scale collaborative science and how her psychology department made the switch from SPSS to R

  • 77: Promiscuous expertise

    February 4th, 2019  |  55 mins 16 secs

    Dan and James discuss how to deal with the problem of scientists who start talking about topics outside their area of expertise. They also discuss what they were to do different if they were to do their PhDs all over again

  • 76: Open peer review

    January 21st, 2019  |  48 mins 8 secs

    Peer review is typically conducted behind closed doors. There's been a recent push to make open peer review standard, but what's often left out of these conversations are the potential downsides. To illustrate this, Dan and James discuss a recent instance of open peer review that led to considerable online debate

  • 75: Overlay journals (with Daniele Marinazzo)

    January 7th, 2019  |  58 mins 18 secs

    We’re joined by Daniele Marinazzo (University of Ghent) to chat about the recently launched overlay journal Neurons, Behavior, Data analysis and Theory (NBDT), for which he on the Editorial Board

  • 74: Seeing double (with Elisabeth Bik)

    December 19th, 2018  |  51 mins 43 secs

    In this episode, Dan and James chat with microbiologist Elisabeth Bik about about the detection of problematic images in scientific papers, the state of microbiome research, and making the jump from academia to industry

  • 73: Update your damn syllabus

    December 3rd, 2018  |  1 hr 1 min

    Dan and James discuss what's missing from biobehavioral science course syllabi

  • 72: Anonymity in scientific publishing

    November 16th, 2018  |  58 mins 4 secs

    Dan and James discuss a new journal of "controversial ideas" that will allow authors to publish articles anonymously. They also launch their Patreon page, in which listeners can support the show and get bonus features

  • 71: Moving for your job

    November 5th, 2018  |  54 mins 15 secs

    In this episode, we chat about whether it’s necessary to move for an academic job to demonstrate “independence”

  • 70: Doubling-blinding dog balls

    October 15th, 2018  |  1 hr 6 mins

    Dan and James discuss the recent "grievance studies" hoax, whereby three people spent a year writing twenty-one fake manuscripts for submission to various cultural studies journals. They also discuss a new proposal to shift publication culture in which researchers pledge to publish exclusively in community-run journals but only when a pre-specified threshold of support for this commitment by the research community has been met

  • 69: Open science tools (with Brian Nosek)

    October 9th, 2018  |  49 mins 2 secs

    We’re joined by Brian Nosek (Centre for Open Science and University of Virginia) to chat about building technology to make open science easier to implement, and shifting the norms of science to make it more open. We also discuss his recent social sciences replication project in which researchers accurately predicted which studies would replicate

  • 68: Friends don’t let friends believe in impact factors (with Nathan Hall)

    September 3rd, 2018  |  1 hr 14 mins

    This episode includes part two of a chat with Nathan Hall (McGill University), who is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say. Before getting to the discussion, James and Dan answer two listener questions on grants and data cleaning.

  • 67: Shit Academics Say (with Nathan Hall)

    August 20th, 2018  |  1 hr 3 mins

    We’re joined by Nathan Hall (McGill University) to chat about the role of humour in academia. Nathan is the person behind the ’Shit academics say’ Twitter account (@AcademicsSay), which pokes fun of all the weird stuff that academics say.

  • 66: Ideal worlds vs grim truths

    August 6th, 2018  |  54 mins 23 secs

    Dan and James answer listener questions on tips for starting your PhD and the role of statistics in exploratory research