But this will require a shift away from using publication and JIF as shorthand ways to evaluate the quality or research. And ways to ensure that post-pub peer review is fairer than the current system (transparency will help, but not eliminate bias).
-
-
Replying to @LisaDeBruine @o_guest and
I think it’s hard for most people to even imagine a world where publication in a traditional journal isn’t necessary for good science, but I’m keen to explore if that can happen.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LisaDeBruine @annemscheel and
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I guess "most people" is relative. When I was on a panel at ICML they thought journals were a great idea. I did correct them this "grass is greener on the other side" mode of seeing neuro/psych.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @LisaDeBruine and
So yeah, for a "no journals" science, see compsci, I guess? They haven't had journals since ever. They just do preprints and proceedings. Is that useful for you?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel and
Compsci is a great example. The parts of psychology that are closer to compsci (e.g., that are testing computation models or using a data-driven approach) aren't well-served by either RRs or the journal-based publication model in general.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @LisaDeBruine @annemscheel and
Yes, obviously. Something I've been saying on Twitter for years.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @o_guest @LisaDeBruine and
The tweet of yours I linked to comes off as saying that publications should all be RRs? But like I said above and you just also repeated, you have changed your perspective since you posted that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @annemscheel and
It's less that I've changed my perspective and more that I'm aware others don't find it obvious that the RR model mostly applies to research in a hypothesis-testing framework so I'm trying to be clearer.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @LisaDeBruine @annemscheel and
Right. A shift in rhetoric. Like I said.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @LisaDeBruine and
Either way you and others in this thread have slowly but surely lost loads of math psych people and/or modelers. I'm interested to see how this will continue as it's caused IMHO quite a deep rift. I was literally just saying the other day that the field seems to be splitting.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
On the one hand, I'm actually really down with that happening. On the other, it's a bit sad, but I can't get/feel too upset given how things are going down.
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @LisaDeBruine and
This isn't meant to change your mind BTW. I'm just preregistering my prediction.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.