195: Living meta-analysis everythinghertz.com/195

We discuss how living meta‑analyses can cut research waste and keep evidence current. We also chat about how using synthetic research participants is a terrible idea and what researchers *really* mean when they call a study "recent".

Just wanted to say my password manager deals with the peer review systems I need to use quite well.

Also, we took away free text response to invitation to review because James kept asking for money.

194: Author verification everythinghertz.com/194

We discuss whether preprint servers and journals should introduce author identity verification for submitting manuscripts. This would probably speed up the submission process, is this worth the potential downsides?

‘Dominant on the river’: 32 Chunk crowned champion in ‘biggest Fat Bear Week yet’ Brown bear’s nearly 100,000 votes leads him to victory despite suffering for most of season with broken jaw

Here’s 32 Chunk, in all his glory www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...

We did this eight (!?) years ago everythinghertz.com/44

Nope we're not kiwis, we're Aussies and OPTIMISTIC

Critical difference!

Here's the PNAS paper: www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...

And here's a blog post on the paper from lead author @reeserichardson.bsky.social reeserichardson.blog/2025/08/04/a...

193: The pop-up journal everythinghertz.com/193

We chat about a a new 'pop-up journal' concept for addressing specific research questions. We also answer a listener question from a journal grammar editor and discuss a recent PNAS paper on paper mills

Nice to hear you’re making your way through the back catalogue!

192: Outsourcing in academia everythinghertz.com/192

We answer listener questions on outsourcing in academia and differences in research culture between academic and commercial institutions

This episode auto-played after an @ologies.bsky.social episode and now I’m very excited about @jamesheathers.bsky.social’s new Medical Evidence Project! Too bad metascience doesn’t have an -ology name.

Dug back through the archives and found our first pandemic episode, which we released on March 16th 2020 everythinghertz.com/104

Here is an interesting project, which - if it finds its way to the right people - has the potential to legitimately help improve public health. The approach to broadcasting the outcomes sounds a bit scary, but ultimately I think it's probably right 1/ #ScientificPublishing #ResearchIntegrity

191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines everythinghertz.com/191

In which we discuss whether scientists critiquing science reduces public trust in science

191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines everythinghertz.com/191

@dsquintana.bsky.social and @jamesheathers.bsky.social discuss James' new 'Medical Evidence Project', whose goal is to find questionable medical evidence that is contaminating treatment guidelines

Estimating the replicability of Brazilian biomedical science Concerns over the replicability and reproducibility of published research have grown in many research fields, but empirical data to inform policies are still scarce. Biomedical research in Brazil expa...

Oh wow. Brazil, I see you trying out there.

Worth some @everythinghertz.com time I feel.

www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

Studies about paying peer reviewers!

We indirectly address this by mentioning how these studies evaluated peer review quality and that these journals are part of established communities

190: What happens when you pay reviewers? everythinghertz.com/190

We chat about two new studies that evaluated the impact of paying reviewers on peer review speed and quality.

One of these studies had such massive effects on peer-review speed we had to double-take the figure.

A photo with Kevin Mitchell on the left and myself on the right

Great to catch up with @wiringthebrain.bsky.social during his visit to Oslo!

I haven’t managed to meet many @everythinghertz.com guests in person but it’s always nice when this can happen

189: Crit me baby, one more time everythinghertz.com/189

We discuss a recent piece that proposes a *post-publication* peer review process, which is triggered by citation counts. We also cover how an altmetric trigger could be used for a more immediate post-publication critique

I Have Written You A Book On Forensic Metascience Use it to cause trouble

Friends, I have written you a book on forensic metascience.

It is free. You can have it. Happy St. Valentine's Day.

If you wish to give me a gift back, you can use it to cause trouble - the greatest gift of all.

open.substack.com/pub/jamescla...

We just updated our handle to @everythinghertz.com. Thanks to @ikashnitsky.phd for the suggestion!

Strong start to 2025 from Everything Hertz #ScientificPublishing though did feel attacked towards the end there (is difficult if you're catty and occasionally mean)

Our patrons get access to our bonus episodes (74 to date!), in which we share the bits that don't make our main episodes.

In our latest bonus ep, we talk about how we edit episodes and the time James went to a hair salon because his hair was too long for a barber www.patreon.com/posts/bonus-...

It was of interest indeed! Thanks for the correction, we’ll mention that in our next recording

We just released a new @hertzpodcast.bsky.social episode, in which we discuss a recent editorial on double-blind peer reviews. The editorial also covers the benefits of open peer review reports, which some people are against for what I think are unconvincing reasons everythinghertz.com/188

Make 👏 research 👏 data 👏 machine👏 readable everythinghertz.com/188