"Our journalists guarantee our quality. Our commitment to independence, diligence, transparency, respect, diversity of opinion and diversity applies no matter what. At the same time, we are keen to investigate how AI tools can support our journalism."
Shai Berlin puts a nice twist on the case for #preprints. Conventional prepublication peer review includes "subjective" considerations such as whether a work is novel, surprising, or journal-relevant. Postpub review of preprints "greatly reduce[s]…subjectivity in the publication process…emancipate[s] scientists from perpetual submissions-rejections rounds &…tiresome & lengthy review duties,…[&] make[s] scientific research & findings accessible by anyone." https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/embr.202358127
The publishing sector has a problem. Scientists are overwhelmed, editors are overworked, special issue invitations are constant, research paper mills, article retractions, journal delistings… JUST WHAT IS GOING ON!?
We need policies that treat special issues differently because they are. We need guidelines from #COPE on a reasonable minimum rigour for #peerreview. We need standard reporting of key metrics like RRs, profit margins, etc… We need leadership, and thank you for all you’ve already done and all you’re going to do. We’re up to chat! 17/n
I have made it a personal policy not to do unpaid work for commercial, for-profit publishers any more. So, #SpringerNature, #Elsevier et al., if you'd like me to review your papers, you'll have to pay me. Otherwise, no deal.
Dear #TRB:
Please do not make us read to the end of the 2nd paragraph to find out our paper was rejected. You do not need to sugar coat it, or tell us how many papers were submitted, or how sad you are that not everyone gets a trophy.
It's ok. Really. Just make it the subject line of the email.
Thank you.
Meet our presenters for the HighWire's Best Practices Webinar.
@BorisBarbour is from @PubPeer, which is a nonprofit that aims to improve the quality of scientific research by providing a platform for the scholarly community to discuss about scientific research after publication. Boris will talk about ‘Post-publication peer review and the PubPeer website’.
Register for the webinar here: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_JhLG9pnLR_ypeP-XyiIaDg
I agree with @emilymbender here: arXiv has become a scourge. There are non-peer-reviewed "articles" on there that have hundreds of citations and are re-shaping entire fields of study, perverting indices like h-index (h-index is obviously problematic but is still sometimes used in hiring decisions and pay increases for people in/around academia). Some of these "articles" have straight-up wrong arguments, wrong ideas, immoral references (e.g. to eugenics and race "science"!) and worse. I think the chokehold publishers have on scientific/academic publishing needs to end, but this is not the way. This is like astrology overtaking and rapidly replacing astronomy.
@ukrio@emilymbender@academicchatter The Medium post reads much more balanced than the quote taken from the tweet. I can relate to many points, in particular the rush to publish and to put out papers quickly. I have two main issues with the post:
The reality (let's say it is the reality) of preprints is compared with an idealized picture of #PeerReview. Do reviewers "[p]erform thorough and careful evaluation"? We probably won't notice in the cases where they do, but 1/
Yet another reason to save reviews as files before entering in the journal submission system:
I had 2 logins for 1 journal, kept on getting "your review is overdue!" notices. Journal fixed the login issue, but the review is .... gone. #peerReview#reviewing
"Publishing [#PeerReview] reports did not significantly compromise referees’ willingness to review, recommendations, or turn-around times. Younger and non-academic scholars were more willing to…review & provided more positive & objective recommendations. Male referees tended to write more constructive reports…Only 8.1% of referees agreed to reveal their identity in the published report."
Identify trusted publishers for your #research
Through a range of tools and practical resources, this international, cross-sector initiative aims to educate #researchers, promote #integrity and build trust in credible research & publications.
The simple and obvious solution to #ResearchMethodology scandals is to shift published #Research from #PeerReview to #PeerReplicated. Boom, problem solved. Look, #Science is under serious attack right now from right-wing conservatives and evangelicals citing religious beliefs. We DO NOT need the kind of scholarly research scandals now plaguing multiple labs and universities, like Stanford. This only serves to provide ammunition to the #AntiEducation sorts making so much noise these days. Make sure accepted research and science is based on results replication, NOT Review.
If reviewers share their comments publicly, linked to a public preprint, journal editors can work from this source and don't need to rely on anonymous info transmitted by the authors.
This critique of #preprints assumes that because they are not subject to conventional pre-publication peer review, they are not subject to any kind of peer review. It shows no awareness of the many kinds of open and post-publication peer review, or even the pre-publication vetting (not equivalent to peer review) done at many preprint repositories. https://www.structuralheartjournal.org/article/S2474-8706(23)00089-1/fulltext
@louisesparza@sociology@politicalscience I must say that the number of the experts that are unable to write the country's name correctly never ceases to amaze me. At least half of my reviewers in #PeerReview processes have done the same. I think we should start problematizing this excessive self-esteem by certain academics in elite institutions. It would take them two seconds to check to see if they got the name correct, but they don't even bother. #Colombia
New research from @capilgram and colleagues in JTLU: "#Transit station area #walkability: Identifying impediments to walking using scalable, recomputable land-use measures"