
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


We discuss how living meta‑analyses—meta‑analyses that are continuously updated as new studies appear—can cut research waste and keep evidence current. We also chat about how using synthetic research participants is a terrible idea.
Links
Social media links
Support Everything Hertz
We discuss whether preprint servers and journals should require author identity verification for submitting manuscripts. This would probably speed up the submission process, but is this worth the potential downsides? We also discuss the similarities and differences between academia and professional sports and a weird case of author identity theft.
Other links
Social media links
Support Everything Hertz
Dan and James chat about a a new 'pop-up journal' concept for addressing specific research questions. They also answer a listener question from a journal grammar editor and discuss a new PNAS article on paper mills
Links
Social media links
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2025, August 7). 193: The pop-up journal, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/2ZMQ7
Support Everything Hertz
Dan and James answer listener questions on outsourcing in academia and differences in research culture between academic institutions and commercial institutions.
Social media links
Citation
Support Everything Hertz
James and Dan discuss James' newly funded 'Medical Evidence Project', whose goal is to find questionable medical evidence that is contaminating treatment guidelines.
Links
Other links
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2025, June 4). 191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/537BN
Support Everything Hertz
We chat about two new studies that took different approaches for evaluating the impact of paying reviewers on peer review speed and quality.
Links
Other links
Citation
Support Everything Hertz
Dan and James discuss a recent piece that proposes a post-publication review process, which is triggered by citation counts. They also cover how an almetrics trigger could be alternatively used for a more immediate post-publication critique.
Links
Other links
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2025, Mar 2). 189: Crit me baby, one more time, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/3X5UR
Support Everything Hertz
Dan and James discuss a recent editorial which argues that double-blind peer review is detrimental to scientific integrity.
Links
Other links
Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2025, Jan 30). Double-blind peer review vs. scientific integrity, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6XS29
Support Everything Hertz
We chat about the events that started the replication crisis in psychology and Dorothy Bishop's recent resignation from the Royal Society
Links
Other links
Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2024, Dec 3). 187: What started the replication crisis era?, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/EC7QH
Support Everything Hertz
In this episode we chat about a Nordic approach for evaluating the journal quality and how we should be teaching undergraduates to evaluate journal and article quality
Links
Other links
Support us on Patreon and get bonus stuff!
Citation
Quintana, D. S., & Heathers, J. (2024, Nov 13). 186: Evaluating journal quality, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KB37U
Support Everything Hertz
From the publisher's feed

32,046 Listeners

300 Listeners

9,187 Listeners

873 Listeners

371 Listeners

2,558 Listeners

111,799 Listeners

15,580 Listeners

157 Listeners

449 Listeners

972 Listeners

15,702 Listeners

15,882 Listeners

3,018 Listeners

12 Listeners