On 24 April, I will speak at the @emspofficial.bsky.social conference about making studies using patient registry data more transparent.
It means a lot to me because a close friend was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis just last year. Hope to learn a lot there!
#EMSP2026
10.03.2026 16:04
π 3
π 0
π¬ 0
π 1
Preregistration in Practice | Paul Meehl Graduate School
February 19, 2026
You still have time to sign up for the upcoming workshop of PMGS.
@denolmo.bsky.social will guide you through evaluating and writing high quality preregistration.
See more and sign up here:
paulmeehlschool.github.io/workshops/pr...
06.02.2026 14:00
π 2
π 4
π¬ 0
π 0
That sounds like a lot! What were the reasons for concerns/retractions?
05.02.2026 14:03
π 0
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Introducing the EEG and ERP Methods Template: Q&A with Gisela Govaart and Antonio Schettino
Interview with Gisela Govaart and Antonio Schettino, developers of the new ERP preregistration template on the Open Science Framework (OSF).
Now available on the OSF as part of a growing collection of preregistration resources, the new EEG & ERP Methods template guides researchers through every stage of ERP study planning. In our Q&A, two of its creators share how the template can help researchers at all stages:
29.01.2026 19:58
π 14
π 9
π¬ 0
π 0
New tool exposes scale of fake research flooding cancer science
A new machine learning tool has identified more than 250,000 cancer research papers that may have been produced by so-called βpaper millsβ.
βIf fabricated studies make their way into the evidence base, they can mislead real scientists and ultimately slow progress for patients."
Published in The BMJ, a new AI tool developed by @aidybarnett.bsky.social and colleagues has exposed the scale of fake studies flooding cancer research.
30.01.2026 04:43
π 32
π 18
π¬ 0
π 4
Is βopen scienceβ delivering benefits? Major study finds proof is sparse
Itβs hard to measure social and economic impacts of making papers and data free, researchers say
#OA articles are cited more, help citizen scientists learn more about the topic they've helped on, but thereβs little strong evidence they have other long-lasting effects on research, or many economic and social benefits www.science.org/content/arti...
@jeffreybrainard.bsky.social @science.org
02.01.2026 10:54
π 5
π 4
π¬ 0
π 0
ChatGPT, are these rhetorical questions?
17.12.2025 01:24
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Ha, I'm also in Sydney atm! It was pretty fiery when I went for a run this afternoon. Are you here for a conference?
26.11.2025 09:17
π 1
π 0
π¬ 1
π 0
Proposal to use more nicknames when talking about scientific researchers, the fun of which is nicely illustrated by James "cheaters' bane" Heathers in his acknowledgement slide.
#AIMOS2025
@jamesheathers.bsky.social
20.11.2025 02:57
π 5
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Slide by Lisa Bero on commercial funding of research. No further comment necessary, I think.
#AIMOS2025
18.11.2025 23:46
π 12
π 3
π¬ 0
π 0
Hi GRIOS, is the contact form on your website functional? I sent a message just after Metascience25 but haven't heard back yet.
01.10.2025 15:13
π 0
π 0
π¬ 1
π 0
@michelenuijten.bsky.social
18.09.2025 06:54
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
π It's great to see authors sharing their experiences with publishing on MetaROR (MetaResearch Open Review) β our open review platform for metascience using the publishβreviewβcurate model: www.openscience.nl/en/cases/the...
09.09.2025 11:42
π 4
π 3
π¬ 0
π 0
Perspective on Scientific Error β 8th Perspectives on Scientific Error Workshop
Here's another conference that aims to bridge fields: errorsin.science/pse8/
In Leiden from 11-13 Feb 2026 (submission deadline 15 October)
08.09.2025 20:57
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
We are about a month away from releasing a complete refresh of the OSF user interface. The team has been working on this for a very long time, and we are very excited to be able to share it soon. A preview picture:
04.09.2025 21:57
π 148
π 30
π¬ 10
π 3
- Journals should state what their aims and scope are from the outset and implement mechanisms to assess whether they achieve those aims. This could also be things like "we want to publish high risk research"
- Meta-research is necessary to find out which journals deserve prestige
#PRC10
04.09.2025 22:23
π 2
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
- "The replication crisis forced changes in transparency for the research itself, but not for the publication process"
- We need to raise our expectations for journals? How? Nullius in verba (don't take their word for it!)
#PRC10
04.09.2025 22:23
π 2
π 0
π¬ 1
π 0
Many interesting tidbits in @simine.com's talk. A selection:
- Journal prestige depends on factors like aims and scope, selectivity, and impact factor, but changes in these factors do not always lead to changes in journal prestige - journal prestige is sticky
#PRC10
04.09.2025 22:23
π 2
π 0
π¬ 1
π 0
There is also a publish-review-curate publishing platform specifically dedicated to meta-research: metaror.org
Send your studies on peer review there and be part of the future of science!
(CoI statement: I'm an ERC representative at MetaROR)
#PRC10
04.09.2025 19:20
π 6
π 3
π¬ 0
π 0
eLife (talk by Nicola Adamson) uses a publish-review-curate method and uses common terms to assess manuscripts.
For strength of evidence: exceptional, compelling, convincing, solid, incomplete, & inadequate
For significance of findings: landmark, fundamental, important, valuable, & useful
#PRC10
04.09.2025 19:17
π 5
π 1
π¬ 2
π 0
New peer review dataset incoming!
Involves authors, topic area, editorial decision, author characteristics (institutional prestige, region, gender), BoRE evaluations, review characteristics (length, sentiment, z-score, reviewer gender).
(Talk by Aaron Clauset)
#PRC10
04.09.2025 19:02
π 4
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Christos Kotanidis checked differences in abstracts between submissions and published papers & assessed whether these differences indicated higher or lower research quality.
Abstracts typically improved, especially in big five medical journals. Evidence for the effectiveness of peer review?
#PRC10
04.09.2025 18:59
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Andrea Corvillon on distributed vs. panel peer review at the ALMA Observatory:
Most experienced PIs no longer have the best ranks in a distributed review system, but why that is remains unclear.
#PRC10
04.09.2025 16:33
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Interesting to see that the conference review process (and publishing norms) are do different in the field of computer science compared to other fields.
How do these differences come about? Fundamental differences between fields or chance and inertia?
#PRC10
04.09.2025 16:20
π 1
π 0
π¬ 1
π 0
Alexander Goldberg did it by a 7-point Likert scale for overall review quality but also by assessing 4 sub-categories: reviewers' understanding of the paper, whether important elements were covered, whether reviewers substantiated their comments, and the constructiveness of reviewer comments.
04.09.2025 16:16
π 0
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Di Girolamo explains why the use of the phrase "to our knowledge" lacks reproducibility and accountability.
Good trigger to make an edit in a grant proposal I'm writing.
#PRC10
04.09.2025 15:04
π 3
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Note by Yulin Yu: Data repurposing may serve as an essential driving mechanism driving scientific innovation BUT may not always garner immediate recognition.
04.09.2025 14:41
π 0
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Data repurposing: taking existing data and reusing it for a different purpose.
(Presentation by Yulin Yu)
Studies repurposing data are at higher risk of bias, so make sure to preregister them (check here for a template): research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publicati...
#PRC10
04.09.2025 14:40
π 9
π 1
π¬ 1
π 0