Everything Hertz

Dan and James discuss a paper describing a journal editor's efforts to receive data from authors who submitted papers with results that seemed a little too beautiful to be true Main edisode takeaways (AI generated summary) This editorial on the reproducibility crisis emphasizes the importance of providing raw data in scientific publications and highlights the need for transparency and accountability in the research process The lack of oversight and the discrepancy between the amount of data required for scientific statements and what is often provided in academic publishing is a cause for concern. Ensuring the integrity of scientific research requires the active involvement of editors, reviewers, and researchers in promoting transparency and upholding ethical standards. The scientific publishing process lacks oversight and accountability, leading to potential issues with the accuracy and trustworthiness of published papers. Journals should prioritize maintaining high standards and ensuring that papers are thoroughly reviewed and validated before publication. Changing behaviors within the scientific community, such as pledging to publish in open access journals, can promote positive change and improve research integrity. There is a need for active maintenance and improvement of the systems and parameters of scientific research to prevent potential negative consequences. Links for papers we mentioned The Molecular Brain editorial by Miyakawa: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13041-020-0552-2 The STALT preprint: https://osf.io/6hste Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2024, Aug 3). 183: Too beautiful to be true Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JF5MSSupport Everything Hertz

Dan and James answer a listener question on what practices should the behavioural sciences borrow (and ignore) from other research fields. Here are the main takeaways: Keeping laboratory records and using electronic lab management software is beneficial practices biology that would benefit the behavioral sciences The rate of pre-registration of meta-analysis in psychology is low, unlike other fields, which have a higher pre-registration rate. Here is the preprint on pre-registration of psychology meta-analyses that was mentioned: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/627a4 Case studies (somewhat common in medicine) can provide valuable insights, especially when there is aggressive sampling and oversampling of single points Double-blinded should not be adopted. as these can be challenging to implement effectively and may not always work as intended Philosophers often (but not always) have a clear writing style and structure their arguments well, which can be enjoyable to read and should be more widely adopted The publishing industry needs more innovation, particularly in the areas of peer review and editorial processes Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2024, July 2). 182: What practices should the behavioural sciences borrow (and ignore) from other research fields? Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XN8DTSupport Everything Hertz

We discuss how following citation chains in psychology can often lead to unexpected places, and how this can contribute to unreplicable findings. We also discuss why team science has taken longer to catch on in psychology compared to other research fields. Here is the preprint that we mentioned authored by Andrew Gelman and Nick Brown - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/ekmdf Our episode with Nick Brown - https://everythinghertz.com/44 Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2024, June 3) "181: Down the rabbit hole", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/C7F9NSupport Everything Hertz

Dan and James discuss why innovation in scientific publishing is so hard, an emerging consortium peer review model, and a recent replication of the 'refilling soup bowl' study. Other things they cover and links: Which studies should we spend time replicating? The business models of for-profit scientific publishers How many tacos can you buy with the money it costs to publish open access in Nature? The original soup bowl study: https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2005.12 The replication study: https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001503 The Peer Community In initiative: https://peercommunityin.org/ Stuart Buck's newsletter: https://goodscience.substack.com Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2024, May 2) "180: Consortium peer reviews", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/24FMPSupport Everything Hertz

Discussion on the neglect of maintenance in scientific research, annual publication limits, downsides of PhD by publication, Gates Foundation's Open Access policy. Exploring commercialization challenges, balancing quality vs quantity in research publications, and influence of funders on research behavior and funding strategies.

Dan and James discuss the Retractobot service, which emails authors about papers they've cited that have been retracted. What should authors do if they discover a paper they've cited has been retracted after they published their paper? Other things they chat about A listener question about including examiner's comments in thesis The different types of retractions and thier impact Why aren't versioning systems more common in scientific publishing? Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2024, February 29) "178: Alerting researchers about retractions", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8HRDSupport Everything Hertz

The podcast discusses two recent plagiarism cases, one well-known and another in Norway. They explore the parallels between plagiarism and sports doping. The mindset and motivations behind plagiarism in academia and sports are compared. Detectability and consequences discourage individuals from cheating. Addressing plagiarism requires identifying genuine cases and avoiding biases.

The podcast discusses the invisible workload of open science, the challenges faced by academics in balancing their commitments, the need for tools to support young researchers, frustrations with the academic submission process, the necessity of mass adoption and funding, and the challenges of tracking academic workloads and collecting data in academia.

We chat about a recent blogpost from Dorothy Bishop, in which she proposes a Master course that will provide training in fraud detection—what should such a course specifically teach and where would these people work to apply their training? We also discuss whether open science is a cult that has trouble seeing outward. Links The blog post on the Master in dark arts defence from Dorothy Bishop The blog post on whether open science is a cult from Andrew Gelman Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, December 7) "175: Defending against the scientific dark arts", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/K2J7NSupport Everything Hertz

James proposes proposes a new type of consortium paper that could provide collaborative opportunities for researchers from countries that are underrepresented in published research papers. We also talk about computational reproducibility and paper publication bonuses. Links The paper from Steve Lindsay on computational reproducbility: A Plea to Psychology Professional Societies that Publish Journals: Assess Computational Reproducibility Other links Everything Hertz on social media Dan on twitter James on twitter Everything Hertz on twitter Everything Hertz on Facebook Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff! $1 per month: A 20% discount on Everything Hertz merchandise, access to the occasional bonus episode, and the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 per month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus episode every month Citation Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2023, October 31) "174: Smug missionaries with test tubes", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/FBHRZSupport Everything Hertz