Peer review is a gift researchers give to the field, worth >$1B globally in 2020. Imagine if more of that generosity flowed straight back into the scholar-led journals that make research free to read and free to publish. Help build that future, become a diamond reviewer forrt.org/diamond-reviewer
Remote
Lukas Röseler
@aufdroeseler@nerdculture.de
mastodon 4.7.3Open Science, Repetition Research, Research on research; likes repetition, likes repetition
61 Followers
108 Following
26 Posts
Joined November 18, 2022
Introducing the #ReplicationAtlas: The FLoRA (FORRT Library of Reproduction and Replication Attempts) lets you browser over two thousand (!) pairs of original and replication studies. Search by DOIs/keywords and find out about replications from your field, maybe even replications of your own work.
Replying to
At CODECHECK, you can nominate your finding for reproduction. An independent researcher then reruns your code. If there are errors, they do not fix them but let the authors know. Once the code works, the codechecker publishes a citable certificate on Zenodo (https://zenodo.org/communities/codecheck/records?q=&l=list&p=1&s=10)
The University of Münster just signed
the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment and the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information!
“Freely accessible knowledge and transparent scientific processes are a cornerstone of responsible science and of public trust in research and innovation”
Press release (German): https://www.uni-muenster.de/news/view.php?cmdid=15286
#openpeerreview cheatsheet: There are lots of ways to open up peer review (e.g.,via publish-review-curate) but since I often hear people discuss open peer review, here is a quick reminder of different dimensions of what this refer to: publication, anonymity, or inclusivity
Replying to
Now that is an informative and beautiful roadmap for a replication study with lots of beautiful @CenterforOpenScience flowers along the way
Replication Research (R2) will be open for submissions from 10-10-2025!
>> Try to reproduce or replicate your favourite findings.
>> Write up your reproduction and replication studies.
>> Share your conceptual expertise or experiences on repetitive research.
https://replicationresearch.org is a researcher-led diamond open access hosted by the Münster Center for Open Science and @FORRT@mastodon.social. We have been creating it with a high degree of community involvement. If you want to contribute, join FORRT (https://forrt.org/about/get-involved/) or apply to be a reviewer, reproducibility checker, copy editor, associate editor, ...: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc67JYOvTMLjnyDBVcxwxcQrgxH8mjvDB7QW7y9nDoTA6kp6Q/viewform?usp=dialog
Replying to
@susanneadler is discussing how replications and educations are the perfect fit. In an MBA seminar, students learn how to conduct a replication & extension and have the option to become a co-author on the eventual preprint/paper.
Replying to
Give one codecheck, get one codecheck: Sign up for the codecheck buddy exchange at https://codecheck.org.uk/buddy-exchange/
Replying to
Check out many resources that help researchers prepare replication packages and replication reports: https://aeadataeditor.github.io @aeadata
Replying to
Today will start at 10:15 CET with @mariannesaam and Sven Vlaeminck from @ZBW_MediaTalk with a presentation of the ReproCheck project, which involves data policies and reproducibility check for journals.
For this one, no registration is needed: https://zbw-eu.zoom.us/j/86271629461?pwd=9O3OoGafzCpjaMhaPb4KknkTEsvVkC.1#success
Replying to
I figured, an endless runner game would work well as a metaphor for the modern academic publishing culture of #publishorperish: Collect pages and data for your papers while dodging paywalls, teaching, and APCs and try to get tenured.
If you agree that maybe this isn't how things should work, I can reassure you: Thousands of signatories of SFDORA.org and coara.eu are reforming the system. If you want a real-life community boost, check out
@FORRT
Replying to
The ReproCheck service is provided by @ZBW_MediaTalk, who also maintain services such as the EconStor preprint server, Open Economics Guide, ZBW Journal Data Archive (with ~2K replication packages!), and much more
Replying to
The plan is to implement a reproducibility check service into the ZBW's Journal Data Archive. For this, they are partnering up with the American Economic Association's, @rwi.bsky.social, and multiple economics journals (GER, JBNST, @jcre.bsky.social).
Replying to
This is the workflow with which they will check several hundred replication packages.
Replying to
Next up is @breznaunate.bsky.social with a guide to computational reproductions for teachers and students.
"Truths come from testing and retesting."
Replying to
Computational reproductions have lots of upsides: learning new methods, networking with the original authors, refreshing skills, and doing a complete study within one semester.
Replying to
Another piece of advice: After doing a reproduction, do an extension
Replying to
"An article about computational science ... is merely advertising of the scholarship"
Replying to
To conclude the #LoveReplicationsWeek, Nina Ehmann and Alexandra Sarafoglou are running a workshop on doing a reproduction/reanalysis. There is no registration needed and if you have 90 minutes to spare, just join here: https://uva-live.zoom.us/j/67572089628
>5h recordings and slides for most #LoveReplicationsWeek talks are now available on our updated website. Thank you so much everybody who contributed to this wonderful week, participated in the talks, and partnered-up with us. I think there should be a replication of this...
The #LoveReplicationsWeek has concluded. Thank you to the 19 speakers and 162 participants! We hope that you could get a glimpse of the amount of love that there is for replications and reproductions.
Website: https://forrt.org/LoveReplicationsWeek/
Slides: https://zenodo.org/communities/lrw/records