as I said at the outset, part of the reason I support this is that I think it's actually very *bad* for the APA in the long term.
-
-
Replying to @talyarkoni @o_guest and
But APA hasn't committed to anything. All these amazing open science tools are now "available" to them
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @maltoesermalte @talyarkoni and
When were they ever not available?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @maltoesermalte @o_guest and
there's a difference between preprint servers existing, and APA saying "we officially endorse people using this preprint service."
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @talyarkoni @maltoesermalte and
Being that it becomes increasingly more monopolised or mainstream? Or both?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @talyarkoni @maltoesermalte and
I would reserve judgement here as why do you think it's more b than a?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @maltoesermalte and
not sure what you're asking; elaborate?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @talyarkoni @maltoesermalte and
To assert it's more b than a implies you think a is unlikely. But in my opinion making a preprint server more mainstream might contribute
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @talyarkoni and
directly to making it monopolised.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
And come people, although arguably not all, might not like the idea of a single preprint server for all psychology that is APA-approved.
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.