Everything Hertz

We discuss James' recent proposal that scientists should be paid for performing peer review for journals published by for-profit companies—$450, to be precise. Dan also puts forward three meta-science projects that he thinks are worth funding. More details * James' tweet (https://twitter.com/jamesheathers/status/1301533455520608256?s=20) proposing peer review should be compensated * Since recording this episode, James has set up the @450Movement twitter account (https://twitter.com/450movement) * Also see James' blog post (https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/the-450-movement-1f86132a29bd) * The Collabra Psychology (https://www.collabra.org/) journal * Did the folks that co-authored the "redefine statistical sigificance (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0189-z)" paper actually go on to follow their own recommendations? * Would high financial compensation of people on job search panels lead to better quality hires? * A tool that would automatically scrape the email addresses the of authors of papers y