Insights from recent episode analysis
Audience Interest
Podcast Focus
Publishing Consistency
Platform Reach
Insights are generated by CastFox AI using publicly available data, episode content, and proprietary models.
Most discussed topics
Brands & references
Est. Listeners
Based on iTunes & Spotify (publisher stats).
- Per-Episode Audience
Est. listeners per new episode within ~30 days
1,001 - 10,000 - Monthly Reach
Unique listeners across all episodes (30 days)
5,001 - 25,000 - Active Followers
Loyal subscribers who consistently listen
5,001 - 15,000
Market Insights
Platform Distribution
Reach across major podcast platforms, updated hourly
Total Followers
—
Total Plays
—
Total Reviews
—
* Data sourced directly from platform APIs and aggregated hourly across all major podcast directories.
On the show
From 10 epsHosts
Recent guests
Recent episodes
195: Living meta-analysis
Jan 14, 2026
37m 00s
194: Author verification
Nov 10, 2025
44m 22s
193: The pop-up journal
Aug 7, 2025
59m 03s
192: Outsourcing in academia
Jul 1, 2025
47m 42s
191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines
Jun 3, 2025
48m 24s
Social Links & Contact
Official channels & resources
Official Website
Login
RSS Feed
Login
| Date | Episode | Topics | Guests | Brands | Places | Keywords | Sponsor | Length | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/14/26 |  195: Living meta-analysis✨ | living meta-analysisresearch waste+2 | — | synthetic panel serviceliving meta-analysis platform for oxytocin research+4 | — | meta-analysisresearch+2 | — | 37m 00s | |
| 11/10/25 | 194: Author verification✨ | author verificationpreprint servers+3 | — | BJKSBluesky James+2 | — | manuscriptssubmission process+2 | — | 44m 22s | |
| 8/7/25 | 193: The pop-up journal✨ | pop-up journalresearch questions+2 | — | pop-up journalPNAS+6 | — | PNASlistener question+1 | — | 59m 03s | |
| 7/1/25 | 192: Outsourcing in academia✨ | outsourcingacademia+3 | — | Bluesky JamesBluesky Everything Hertz+3 | — | — | — | 47m 42s | |
| 6/3/25 | 191: Cleaning up contaminated medical treatment guidelines✨ | medical evidencetreatment guidelines+1 | James Heathers | NatureBluesky James+4 | — | medical researchevidence-based medicine+1 | — | 48m 24s | |
| 4/2/25 | 190: What happens when you pay reviewers?✨ | peer reviewmonetary incentives+1 | James Heathers | Critical Care MedicineBiology Open+3 | — | reviewersstudies+3 | — | 44m 25s | |
| 3/2/25 | 189: Crit me baby, one more time✨ | post-publication reviewcitation counts+2 | — | ChonicleEverything Hertz+6 | — | sciencesocial science+2 | — | 53m 40s | |
| 1/30/25 | 188: Double-blind peer review vs. scientific integrity✨ | double-blind peer reviewscientific integrity | — | Everything HertzBluesky Dan+5 | — | editorialpeer review+1 | — | 54m 56s | |
| 12/3/24 | 187: What started the replication crisis era?✨ | replication crisispsychology+2 | — | the Royal SocietyEverything Hertz+6 | — | replication crisis erapsychology events+1 | — | 55m 08s | |
| 11/13/24 | 186: Evaluating journal quality✨ | journal qualityNordic approach+1 | — | Norwegian journal registerFinnish journal register+3 | — | evaluationeducation+1 | — | 43m 11s | |
Want analysis for the episodes below?Free for Pro Submit a request, we'll have your selected episodes analyzed within an hour. Free, at no cost to you, for Pro users. | |||||||||
| 10/4/24 | 185: The Retraction | We discuss the recent retraction of a paper that reported the effects of rigour-enhancing practices on replicability. We also cover James' new estimate that 1 out of 7 scientific papers are fake. Links The story about data integrity concerns in 130 women’s health papers James' new preprint with the estimate that 1 out of 7 scientific papers are fake The retracted paper in Nature Human Behavior by Protzko and coworkers The Matters Arising article from Bak-Coleman and Devezer, who initially raised concerns about the paper from Protzko and coworkers. The Everything Hertz merch store The paper about puns/jokes in paper titles The "Everything Hertz" paper from James Dan's only paper with a pun in the title 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, Oct 4). 185: The Retraction, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/528SFSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 9/5/24 | 184: A race to the bottom | Open access articles have democratized the availability of scientific research, but are author-paid publication fees undermining the quality of science? The preprint by Morgan and Smaldino - https://osf.io/preprints/osf/3ez9v Paul Smaldino's text book - Modeling social behavior Main edisode takeaways (AI-assisted summary) There is a wide variability in the quality of papers published in gold open access journals and a wide variate of open access journals, some of which prioritise quality research Diamond open access and green open access are alternative models to consider. The publishing industry needs more transparency and mandatory reporting of data. The pressure to publish more can lead to a crowding out problem and a focus on quantity over quality. Determining the quality of journals and papers is challenging, and there are varying levels of quality within different tiers of journals. Fraudulent publishing practices, such as paper mills and fake papers, can be facilitated by the market for publishing. The Publons service (R.I.P) and similar platforms can improve the transparency of peer review and provide a record of reviewers' contributions. Society journals may offer a better publishing model as they have a reputation to maintain and are less likely to prioritize quantity over quality. 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, Sept 5). 184: A race to the bottom, Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3MUJVSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 8/3/24 | 183: Too beautiful to be true | 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 | — | ||||||
| 7/2/24 | 182: What practices should the behavioural sciences borrow (and ignore) from other research fields? | 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 | — | ||||||
| 6/3/24 | 181: Down the rabbit hole | 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 | — | ||||||
| 5/2/24 | 180: Consortium peer reviews | 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 | — | ||||||
| 4/3/24 | 179: Discovery vs. maintenance | Dan and James discuss how scientific research often neglects the importance of maintenance and long-term access for scientific tools and resources. Other things they cover: Should there be an annual limit on publications (even if this were somehow possible)? The downsides of PhD by publication The Gates Foundation's new Open Access policy 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, April 3) "179: Discovery vs. maintenance", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/KS8PVSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 2/29/24 | 178: Alerting researchers about retractions | 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 | — | ||||||
| 1/31/24 | 177: Plagiarism | We discuss two recent plagiarism cases, one you've probably heard about and another that you probably haven't heard about if you're outside Norway. We also chat about the parallels between plagiarism and sports doping—would people reconsider academic dishonesty if they were reminded that future technology may catch them out? Here are some of the takeaways from the episode (generated with the help of AI): Plagiarism cases can range from minor academic practice issues to more serious instances of copying verbatim The detection and punishment of plagiarism can vary depending on the context, such as academic journals or internal university issues. The mindset and motivations behind plagiarism can differ between athletes and students, with athletes often driven by intense competition. Long-term detectability and the potential consequences of cheating are factors that may discourage individuals from engaging in plagiarism. Addressing plagiarism requires a balance between identifying genuine cases and avoiding ideological biases. 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, January 31) "177: Plagiarism", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/4M3F2Support Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 12/29/23 | 176: Tracking academic workloads | We chat about a paper on the invisible workload of open science and why academics are so bad at tracking their workloads. This episode was originally recorded in May 2023 in a hotel room just before our live recording of Episode 169, which is why we refer to the paper as a 'new' paper near the start of the episode. Links The paper on the invisible workload of open research Our live and in-person episode with Sandra Matz on using big data to understand behavior 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 29) "176: Tracking academic workloads", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/U84JCSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 12/7/23 | 175: Defending against the scientific dark arts | 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 | — | ||||||
| 11/1/23 | 174: Smug missionaries with test tubes | 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 | — | ||||||
| 10/1/23 | 173: How do science journalists evaluate psychology papers? | Dan and James discuss a recent paper that investigated how science journalists evaluate psychology papers. To answer this question, the researchers presented science journalists with fictitious psychology studies and manipulated sample size, sample representativeness, p-values, and institutional prestige Links The paper on how science journalists evaluate psychology papers The preprint paper on small samples Laboratory Life by Bruno Latour 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, September 30) "173: How do science journalists evaluate psychology papers?", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/SG4BMSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 8/31/23 | 172: In defence of the discussion section | Dan and James discuss a recent proposal to do away with discussion sections and suggest other stuff they'd like to get rid of from academic publishing. Links The paper on the proposed elimiation of the discussion section The paper on machine readable hypothesis tests Our episodes with Daniel Lakens Our episode with Lisa DeBruine 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, August 31) "172: In defence of the discussion section", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/N3SFTSupport Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
| 7/20/23 | 171: The easiest person to fool is yourself (with Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris) | We chat with Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris about the science of cons and how we can we can avoid being taken in. We also cover the fate of the gorilla suit from the 'invisible gorilla' study, why scientists are especially prone to being fooled, plus more! Buy Daniel and Christopher's new book, Nobody's fool, from your favourite bookseller here. 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, July 20) "171: The easiest person to fool is yourself (with Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F8SMRSpecial Guests: Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons.Support Everything Hertz | — | ||||||
Showing 25 of 182
Sponsor Intelligence
Sign in to see which brands sponsor this podcast, their ad offers, and promo codes.
Chart Positions
6 placements across 6 markets.
Chart Positions
6 placements across 6 markets.