petersuber, to academicchatter
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Kudos to the (@thecrick) for its policy on and ,
https://www.crick.ac.uk/research/publications/accessing-our-research

In addition to supporting , content , and reforms, it applies licenses to all research carried out at the institute.

h/t @sallyrumsey


@academicchatter @openscience

ukrio, to academicchatter
@ukrio@mstdn.science avatar

"arXiv is a cancer that promotes the dissemination of junk 'science' in a format that is indistinguishable from real publications."

Riled by low-quality about , @emilymbender pulls no punches. Thoughts, @academicchatter?

https://medium.com/@emilymenonbender/scholarship-should-be-open-inclusive-and-slow-15ab6ce1d74c

gpollara, to academicchatter
@gpollara@med-mastodon.com avatar

An interesting Letter to the Editor in CMI. It actually makes 2 separate but related points: 🧵

  1. States the benefits of authors re-using peer review performed by other journals, even in the case of paper rejects. It points out the importance of honesty by the authors (though presumably journals can talk to each and also share that information).
    @academicchatter (1/2)
    https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(23)00364-6/fulltext?dgcid=raven_jbs_aip_email
HansZauner,
@HansZauner@ecoevo.social avatar

@gpollara @academicchatter

Open #PeerReview and #Preprints solve the honesty problem:

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.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • KamenRider
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • KbinCafe
  • Socialism
  • oklahoma
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • All magazines