@drseanmullen This is how open collaborative peer review works, as we have in @JOSS_TheOJ It's also described (with pros and cons) in https://t.co/BLrC0mGO3P

A propos whether F1000Res publishers anything good and on topic for this episode: https://t.co/75KgJ0VUG0

RT @dasaptaerwin: Tahun 2017 saya sempat bergabung dengan mendian Jon Tennant dkk menulis ini. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent…

RT @dasaptaerwin: Tahun 2017 saya sempat bergabung dengan mendian Jon Tennant dkk menulis ini. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent…

Tahun 2017 saya sempat bergabung dengan mendian Jon Tennant dkk menulis ini. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review https://t.co/ZZrHqmXOnK

@OlufemiOTaiwo this review might be of interest https://t.co/7xxBs8YnHy

@moorehn Here are more ideas on peer-review reformation that are currently being considered: https://t.co/BONkoHimDv

@leecronin Sure, no one would object here. But how? There's a lot we have to reform here. And there are many great initiatives out there which I can't name all but if you're really interested this might help: https://t.co/nZ9h2LbcvF @DisruptingPoli2 h

@m_wall @andpru This article gives a good historical overview too, including timeline figures https://t.co/IxVXkD8sw7

Here's the article referenced by Ana Marusic detailing the history and development of #peerreview initiatives and practices https://t.co/tISJa0GyxY @AKC_VU #SummerSeminar

@brembs I didn't find a better summarizing & forward looking article than this one on peer review: https://t.co/ItmABaDsam "As Smith (2010) succinctly stated, “we have little or no evidence that peer review ‘works,’ but we have lots of evidence of it

@js_rubin @docstobar You are not alone in this assessment: https://t.co/vTCPsG79yZ. Those arguing for open PR models haven't found much evidence of systematic retaliation by senior scholars & think the solution, if this is an issue, is more transparenc

RT @josmel1: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. #research #PeerReview #openaccess @Protohe…

RT @josmel1: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. #research #PeerReview #openaccess @Protohe…

RT @josmel1: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. #research #PeerReview #openaccess @Protohe…

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. #research #PeerReview #openaccess @Protohedgehog https://t.co/j5Zyf2IwpV https://t.co/XAWC9j2l0d

@sampenrose @michael_nielsen A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (https://t.co/BLrC0mYoVn) might also be of interest

omg - someone else please visit https://t.co/U1fMl91Jzf and screenshot the website you get and post it in the replies. the website that it's supposed to be is "another new service that facilitates peer review of preprints" (https://t.co/wxAQJ95yQI)/

@luisreyes Looking for analysis across time and disciplines I think that these two references about the particularities of the process seen in the current movement of open science may interest you: https://t.co/0cnNvqBGOm https://t.co/zcNNsjhc6C

Neki znanstvenici (posebice koji dolaze iz miljea otvorene znanosti) tvrde (ponekad empirijski potkrepljeno) kako recenzija sprovodi na institucionalnoj razini razno razne pristranosti, cementira status quo. https://t.co/MeRAKNwCAc

@BigodeLatino Leituras: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review https://t.co/HPwpoxKbNQ Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing https://t.co/h14ZG07UBN

I will list below some extra reading on the topic, should you feel like twitter and research are not eating up enough of your time already. https://t.co/1sEkzpcccC https://t.co/eckFVVnF2T https://t.co/IXkRHu8kaY https://t.co/rwREiN5d05 15/15

@coristus @Alicia1984N @MerlotVine Een leuke serie hierover is reeks 'Scientific Utopia' artikelen van Brian Nosek (de directeur van Center for Open Science). https://t.co/uC5MR3Vikp en deze van Tennant et al. geeft ook een goed overzicht van ontwikkelinge

@wisnuafrian @adisetyop Dan peer review (PR) pun di jurnal kan tertutup. Masalah PR tertutup ini jg sdh dipandang jd masalah (di dunia). Kami pernah “keroyokan” menulis ini https://t.co/5F2jNcSKjy.

@RickyPo I support Open Access wholeheartedly; it may offer some solutions to issues in the peer review process. However, it can be challenging to implement, especially for new scholars. Cf. A multidisciplinary approach to Open peer review https://t.co/W

Awesome resources, the first a state of the peer review system (as of 2011), the second examines "emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer r

@AthenaAktipis Two wide-ranging projects: the 2011 report from the Center for Studies in Higher Education at Berkeley (https://t.co/Bj13ZgSrEn); and the review of emerging forms of review by Tennet et al.: https://t.co/iGlliPdCNb.

https://t.co/N9JZ0iT5vH Read this article about research communities for the first time almost 2 years ago. I am still impressed by the idea behind it and how it tries to address existing problems.

I don't know what is the best way to handle citations with co-authors who did no harm, truly had no idea of the abuse. I would never suggest someone remove themselves off a prior paper (remove the abuser off current projects def). But my god, the solidarit

@Julie_B92 ik it's a huge & tricky decision to withdraw from paper (I'm not a PhD researcher or "proper scientist" so my contribution probably doesn't matter as much) but, maybe it's possible to do so by asking publisher? Here's the paper https://t.co/

@jorgelpolanco Uno de mis #preprint #openpeerreview tiene más vistas que el artículo final. https://t.co/s3lkMPxKqS https://t.co/TMvaU5KwV2

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and... | F1000Research #force2019 https://t.co/hPBbnAU5sn

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

RT @jeffersonpooley: Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studi…

Interesting new @socarxiv preprint by @Protohedgehog and Tony Ross-Hellauer, floating the idea of a ‘peer review studies’ field https://t.co/A7LEYbuCVG Their 2017 paper on rethinking peer review deserves much more attention could be the field's charter htt

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review "...there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages". https://t.co/DuaWbzVEXm

RT @nicholdav: @o_guest @bradpwyble @KriegeskorteLab @INM7_ISN Seems like @kyleniemeyer and @cMadan have done some work on this and/or know…

@o_guest @bradpwyble @KriegeskorteLab @INM7_ISN Seems like @kyleniemeyer and @cMadan have done some work on this and/or know people who already have thought about it a lot? https://t.co/R3NjPNPnn7

@gwstrong_gary @thackerpd Thanks! Both of us have written a loooot about this before, eg https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX

RT @Protohedgehog: @AndrewGYork @LancasterSci This looks great! Similar what we proposed in Section 4 here too - feel free to use any ideas…

RT @siminevazire: "This represented a shift from peer review as a more synergistic activity among scholars, to commercial entities selling…

RT @siminevazire: "This represented a shift from peer review as a more synergistic activity among scholars, to commercial entities selling…

RT @siminevazire: "This represented a shift from peer review as a more synergistic activity among scholars, to commercial entities selling…

"This represented a shift from peer review as a more synergistic activity among scholars, to commercial entities selling it as an added value service back to the same academic community who was performing it freely for them" 🔥🔥🔥 https://t.co/75cTCJshbe @Pr

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review https://t.co/aTrNPkQA4i

@soragnilab SO MANY! This one https://t.co/J6Qx6Edtpk this one https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX this one https://t.co/INWV6sR5bI and this one is in progress https://t.co/wlyfwjxvi0 All have benefited massively from sharing and discussions on Twitter.

@_Anthropoid @JonattonY @PubPeer @OSFramework @biorxivpreprint Digging Protonhedgehog. Here's one paper a bunch of us wrote about the history, present state, and future of peer review https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX and another on potential future stuff again http

@EtzrodtMartin @Larsohrstrom Learning more about the history of review changed my whole perspective on many elements of schol comm (see also refs here in history section https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX). And thay yes, there are perhaps modern technologies that cou

@LibKathryn Yeah, the history of peer review is awesome! We wrote about it here https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX following some excellent research from @AileenFyfe and co. I agree with you, and think societies have a lot of tough questions to ask of themselves.

@james_t_webber @lonnibesancon @Lee__Drake Definitely possible! See section 3 here for possible applications of some of these models https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX

Entendamos un poco mejor las "peers reviews", el modelo de revisión / publicación de contenido utilizado por wikipedia (entre otros). ¿Un modelo sospechoso de falta de veracidad o un modelo utilizado de forma incorrecta? https://t.co/TLV2XqaZbP #DDC19_2

RT @DanGorman2: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations.... Tennant JP et al., published by @F1000Research, htt…

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations.... Tennant JP et al., published by @F1000Research, https://t.co/Fizi8iOoYl

RT @Science_Open: ‘A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in #peerreview’ an @F1000Research article on #Scienc…

RT @Science_Open: ‘A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in #peerreview’ an @F1000Research article on #Scienc…

‘A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in #peerreview’ an @F1000Research article on #ScienceOpen: #AcadAPE https://t.co/Blyrzp9GFY https://t.co/u0V3xVdvz3

@nbaker @Rwelzenb possibly? maybe the way that F1000 publishes their version dois (like here: https://t.co/UMsgVDuWjS) but would only be for substantial revisions

Pondering the future of peer review, specifically via @Protohedgehog at al's https://t.co/FTE0OylqjJ (a propos side note: interesting ideas about editing as a multi-stage QC process & Twitter as peer review platform in reviewer 2's 1st report)

@montell_denise @yoginho @F1000Research I'm not really sure why you would say that when a) in the titles of each paper it says that they are, b) you can see the reviews themselves, and c) you can see the improvements we made based on each round of review.

@BioMickWatson @luispedrocoelho @drosophilosophy Bit more complicated than that. See here https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX Eg "When author names were blinded, 62% of reviewers could not identify the authors, while 17% could identify authors ≤10% of the time." https

RT @MDDelahunty: Future vision for academic peer-review: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations.... Tennant JP…

Future vision for academic peer-review: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations.... Tennant JP et al., published by @F1000Research, https://t.co/xKWW9ocnpw

@Larsohrstrom @alc_anthro @cha_weber @m_onlein @Eurodoc @gtoneill There's not much out there really, and often is conflicting and small scale. Check the paper here https://t.co/JffhZoSS73 and see work from @squazzoni and @tonyR_H for a bit more :)

@alc_anthro @Larsohrstrom @cha_weber @m_onlein @Eurodoc @gtoneill Sure, I understand that pretty well. See the paper above, and this one if you want a longer read.. https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX

@MDDelahunty Thank you! We wrote some thoughts about AI and peer review here https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX (Section 3.8). Will read your thinking too, thanks :)

RT @Protohedgehog: @koen_hufkens @hypothes_is Yep, agree. We wrote about the value of hypothesis as an annotation tool here https://t.co/Ab…

RT @Protohedgehog: @koen_hufkens @hypothes_is Yep, agree. We wrote about the value of hypothesis as an annotation tool here https://t.co/Ab…

@koen_hufkens @hypothes_is Yep, agree. We wrote about the value of hypothesis as an annotation tool here https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX But most publishers still act like we live in a pre-digital world. While simultaneously claiming to be masters of technological

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @DennisEckmeier: A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review - version 3 https://t.co/kLRJAPsONg

@Rosewind2007 @PublicChaffinch @Chemosym @schneiderleonid @Suw Here they give some historical background that is quite interesting. https://t.co/kLRJAPsONg

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review - version 3 https://t.co/kLRJAPsONg

@afrakt @aaronecarroll really enjoyed this column / thread on peer review! adding 2 refs. first, a randomized experiment to assess randomness in reviews for machine learning's biggest conference: https://t.co/Dwqr7pA3Py second, a paper w/ "potential futu

RT @Protohedgehog: For more on how #blockchain could be potentially be used for peer review, check secction 3.7 here https://t.co/AbXOC05OR…

RT @Protohedgehog: For more on how #blockchain could be potentially be used for peer review, check secction 3.7 here https://t.co/AbXOC05OR…

RT @Protohedgehog: For more on how #blockchain could be potentially be used for peer review, check secction 3.7 here https://t.co/AbXOC05OR…

RT @Protohedgehog: For more on how #blockchain could be potentially be used for peer review, check secction 3.7 here https://t.co/AbXOC05OR…

For more on how #blockchain could be potentially be used for peer review, check secction 3.7 here https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX And for some thoughts on what the future of peer review could look like if we embraced modern tech https://t.co/foHuTADAJ9 #BFSCON #B

@aaronecarroll @UpshotNYT Thanks for this, really great piece! For some thoughts on the future of peer review, maybe these articles would be interesting for you too :) https://t.co/foHuTADAJ9 and https://t.co/AbXOC05ORX

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @aurelberra: Un superbe article sur l’évaluation par les pairs : état des lieux, historique, proposition. Je le recommande chaleureuseme…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…

RT @crihunum: Le gagnant du Prix Jean-Claude Guédon pour 2018 est Jon Tennant pour son article « A multi-disciplinary perspective on emerge…