😂

Do you think there's a future where journals will be able to make it mandatory for authors to include their data with publication?

Thanks! I'm glad you think our concept at @stacksjournal.bsky.social is interesting. Authors and reviewers have really enjoyed the process and found that it helped create better science.

I wish it was always the standard, but unfortunately it's not the case.

It definitely helps us learn and grow as researchers so I hope we see more and more journals bringing this process in.

I think it happens in some journals, but not all. Many of the times I've reviewed articles I don't even learn what the outcome was.

That's great that it's common in psychology journals. What's the process like for how they do it?

So if you believe in #peerreview as a fundamental part of the scientific process that increases trust, take a look at what we're building at @stacksjournal.bsky.social.

I think you'll find it to be a breath of fresh air.

6/6

Which is why I think it's time to reimagine what the systems of #peerreview can and should look like.

It's actually why I left my faculty job to create a system of peer review that is ethical, transparent, and fair.

5/

In a world where science is losing its credibility and powerful people continue to undermine it, I believe we need to come together and show that #peerreview actually means something.

That it's how we safeguard the knowledge of our fields for generations to come.

4/

But above all, we need to ensure that the published science is trustworthy.

And that comes from structured peer review. Where qualified experts come together to not only vet each other's research, but to collaborate and help make it stronger.

3/

Yes, we need to remove barriers to sharing research.

Yes, the big publishers have taken advantage of scientists for too long.

Yes, it shouldn't cost thousands of dollars to have your work peer-reviewed.

2/

I love this perspective!

Glad to see more journals valuing these negative results!

That's too bad. Did they provide helpful feedback for you to improve your work? Have you been able to get them back into peer review?

Yes -- I love it when that happens! It's great when reviewers show up to collaborate and help improve the research.

Been there myself!

I completely agree that publicly funded research should be free to the public and be reproducible! I'm not sure that I believe AI should be playing a major role in peer review. I can see some opportunities for it to support human reviewers, but I don't think we should be relying solely on AI.

I agree that the system needs some major improvements. Journal name is no longer (has ever been?) a good proxy for quality.

I'm not quite sure that we can get rid of systematic peer review in favor of preprints, though. I believe we should be finding new ways to make peer review work again.