Paul Whaley 👍

4.8K posts

Paul Whaley 👍 banner
Paul Whaley 👍

Paul Whaley 👍

@paul_msg

Open science and systematic review pest. Editor-in-Chief at @EBTJournal. Not posting on X anymore, on LinkedIn instead. https://t.co/TxIFYCV3fQ

Lancaster University, UK Katılım Mayıs 2008
513 Takip Edilen935 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
And here it is, our first accepted manuscript at Evidence-Based Toxicology, a new open-science journal for environmental health research.
Evidence-Based Toxicology@EBTJournal

Big News: We have accepted our first manuscript at EBT - a protocol for the development of INVITES-IN, a tool for assessing the internal validity of in vitro studies. Accepted preprint here: zenodo.org/record/7899720 and reviewer assessment reports are here zenodo.org/record/7899720

English
0
1
3
767
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@aemonten There are ways of making PRC compatible with Clarivate's current requirements for JIF (and I'm not sure why eLife are being so stubborn about it). Of course, Clarivate could be a bit more bloody flexible as well, so I dare say a solution will be found.
English
0
0
1
144
Alejandro Montenegro
Alejandro Montenegro@aemonten·
What are the implications of such decision for the PRC (Publish Review Curate) model? Will journals planning on implementing such approach change their course?
English
1
0
2
3K
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@aemonten Merits of this decision to one side, what I want to know is, who made Clarivate King of the Journals?
English
1
0
12
2.7K
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@JamesSteeleII That's very confusing. My journal requires submitting authors to have a "registered" preprint of a manuscript so there is a permanent public record of the manuscript they sent to use for evaluation - but that's not what is happening here, is it?
English
0
0
0
288
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@dieworkwear For better or worse, this is a fabric and colour combo which attempts to follow @dieworkwear advice off the peg and on a tight budget. You are correct that the shirt does not fit very well and I struggle with tying a tie. :))))
Paul Whaley 👍 tweet media
English
0
0
0
118
derek guy
derek guy@dieworkwear·
I've addressed this many times and have been reluctant to use people's videos, as they're often made by regular people who are just trying to have fun. But this is a famous content creator with 1M followers, so I feel better about showing why this doesn't work. 🧵
Justin McLamore@JustinBPerfumer

You def can’t mess this up.

English
317
3.8K
50.1K
12.6M
Wes Johnson
Wes Johnson@Venice_Wes·
@Nature I want to point out that ‘oh fuck off’ has almost 225x the likes per view as the original post. HOWS THAT FOR SCIENCE
English
1
0
3
257
nature
nature@Nature·
Stop using ‘summer’, ‘winter’ and the rest when inviting researchers to events — it’s a small step, but it’s necessary and inclusive go.nature.com/4dUMxT0
English
3.4K
111
605
4.7M
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@RodWhiteley @jamesheathers Unless you are doing alphanumeric ordering for dates in which case obviously YYYY-MM-DD is the one true religion. You can send me my gifts and cards on 2024-11-14. (I will allow underscores.)
English
0
0
0
47
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@albertobaccini @PredatoryReport Exactly. I am a director of a non-profit company and we are required to hold assets that would allow us to continue as a going concern during downturns in business. If our expenditure was around the 30 million mark (I wish!) we would want to retain 10-20% of that.
English
0
0
1
23
alberto baccini
alberto baccini@albertobaccini·
@PredatoryReport The notion of a not-for-profit company depends on the law, not on your opinion. It does not mean zero assets! PLOS is not-profit. In 2022 it has $34 mil in APC revenues and spends $28.6 mil for publishing. If you don't like that, you cannot claim that not-profit is the solution.
English
2
0
5
238
Predatory Journals
Predatory Journals@PredatoryReport·
About Plos One being a "non-profit" PLOS Biology: Research Article $5,500 Short Reports $5,500 Update Article $3,150 🤡 PLOS Medicine: Research Article $6,300 Do you believe they spend that money to publish a PDF online? Plus, they had almost $26 million in assets in 2022. 🤑
English
3
8
21
2.6K
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@PredatoryReport @aemonten I'm not defending any particular pricing model, but we need to recognise there is a lot more in scientific publishing than posting a PDF online. If you are working with Western employees and editors, and paying people, I'd estimate that a 3.5k-4k APC might just break even.
English
0
0
1
34
Predatory Journals
Predatory Journals@PredatoryReport·
@aemonten PLOS Biology: Research Article $5,500 Short Reports $5,500 Update Article $3,150 PLOS Medicine: Research Article $6,300 Do you believe they spend that money to publish a PDF online? Plus, they had almost $26 million in assets in 2022...
English
4
3
10
1K
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@annemscheel It's not how bad stats ed was, it is about performative academia now, is it not? This is not the most egregious analysis Haidt has performed by any stretch, and we can throw Peterson and a bunch of others in this pile.
English
0
0
0
227
Anne Scheel
Anne Scheel@annemscheel·
I genuinely struggle to understand how you can be a tenured psychology professor and think you can “reanalyse” a meta-analysis by literally averaging the included effects. Is this just how bad stats education was pre 2011?
English
15
29
242
96.8K
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
Editor-in-Chief highlight of the week? Peer-review report for a protocol for testing automated data extraction tools. Really constructive, esp. on planned analysis methods - so often missing from protocols, and so easy to miss the missing as a reviewer. zenodo.org/records/133671…
English
0
0
1
105
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
EBT is participating in what is probably the first-ever randomised controlled trial of an intervention to improve peer-review. It is... complicated, because it turns out running controlled trials in journals is just unbelievably difficult to do, but Noah has us covered.🤘
English
0
1
1
637
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@JamesSteeleII Damn, I definitely *would* but it's September 202*4* and I am already in three places. 😭
English
0
0
0
70
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
This is very cool, and I can't believe I get to be involved in Noah flourishing. (Did I get that right?)
English
0
0
1
78
Paul Whaley 👍
Paul Whaley 👍@paul_msg·
@aemonten This is why Gates Foundation is setting up its own preprint server, is it not?
English
1
0
0
36
Alejandro Montenegro
Alejandro Montenegro@aemonten·
Ashley asks whether authors feel they get what they pay for when paying APCs. I ask, do funders? If this was just about access to the work done by a fundee, a preprint requirement would be enough. And could be achieved by a lot less money.
Alejandro Montenegro@aemonten

@ashleydfarley In may cases, they did, just by feeling they complied with funder/institutional mandate. Another key question, however, is, did the funder? Do they feel they got what they paid for, which could have been achieved with a preprint policy? :)

English
1
0
3
1.1K

Keşfet

@aemonten @dieworkwear @Venice_Wes @Nature @RodWhiteley @albertobaccini @PredatoryReport @MicrobiomDigest