Ok, if citation impact is meant to be just citations, I vote for Vickers 2017 for huge citation/minimal actual impact #ScientificPublishing #ResearchIntegrity I'm sure it's a nice paper, but cure cancer it will not.

Academics set their metrics and incentives. And that defines everything. Including the future of scientific publishing. And if at any point, one feels that incentives are being defined from outside, that's what needs to be fought against. But the power of change lies within.

Started listening to the latest bonus episode of @everythinghertz.com and can't decide if you guys completely lost it, or am I missing something because of the accent 🧸

In praise of fundamental research Our editorial this week argues that I n these financially straitened times, funders must recognize that great discoveries often arise from work that was looking for something completely different 🧪 @nature.com www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Hard agree w/prediction. Wd also point out that publishing replications studies, as defined here, but also those that escape this definition, is a solved problem (it's only not solved if you want it in glam journal but that is a diff't category of problem) #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing

1/ Alright, this one’s been sitting in my drawer for a year now, after @mcxfrank.bsky.social and I got turned down for a public commentary. But before I forget about it completely, here’s the preprint: Can we harvest insights for rice theory from two state farms in China? osf.io/preprints/ps...

We apologise for delays in #PeerReview due to a shortage of editors caused by a significant leaf fall. Leaves, famously, are editors' kryptonite #OverlyHonestEditor In other words, the autumn is here.

And here I thought it was 8hrs sleep a night, no alcohol, and kale based diet...

Free data resources in science are having the shit mined out of them to produce X,000's of bullshit papers. What should we do? (Warning: I sat on this draft for too long, and publishers are already doing some of it. That's what I get for engaging with the news.) open.substack.com/pub/jamescla...

To be fair, I'm genuinely worried about a flood of trivial and false findings before we even move to trivial and true or true and interesting #OverlyHonestEditor

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you: "I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you: "I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

Sounds like a fascinating paper in @science.org Sci Advances, if you can find it, that is #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview

Spick & Richardson offer advice to editors on how to avoid formulaic research #ResearchIntegrity #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview While I admire enthusiasm this is, forgive my cynicism, preaching to editors #OverlyCynicalEditor 1/

Spick & Richardson offer advice to editors on how to avoid formulaic research #ResearchIntegrity #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview While I admire enthusiasm this is, forgive my cynicism, preaching to editors #OverlyCynicalEditor 1/

Missed this piece of news earlier this summer: AAAI starts experimenting with AI reviews 4 their #AAAI-26 conference. As always, this is meant to assist & be with supervision #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview #ArtificialIntelligence Don't be mistaken 1/ aaai.org/aaai-launche...

Editor Cat-zhang just saw a manuscript with v57 in the name, and felt its conscience pang so so hard (then realised this is first submission, which lessened cat's guilt but still sucks for the authors) #ScientificPublishing #JoysOfPeerReview #OverlyHonestEditor

What a doozie of a retraction notice: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...! Hard to know where to look #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing (H/t @mattjhodgkinson.bsky.social)

Editor Cat-mondo receives an email with the line: "I fully appreciate the many demands on your time and the complexity involved in coordinating the peer review and editorial processes." which then proceeds to accuse editor/reviewer of use of AI #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing

Editor Cat-mondo receives an email with the line: "I fully appreciate the many demands on your time and the complexity involved in coordinating the peer review and editorial processes." which then proceeds to accuse editor/reviewer of use of AI #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing

So apparently citing biological resources can help obtain higher impact factors. IN MICE #ScientificPublishing @inmice.bsky.social journals.plos.org/plosone/arti...

Editor Cat-zhang just saw a manuscript with v57 in the name, and felt its conscience pang so so hard (then realised this is first submission, which lessened cat's guilt but still sucks for the authors) #ScientificPublishing #JoysOfPeerReview #OverlyHonestEditor

So apparently citing biological resources can help obtain higher impact factors. IN MICE #ScientificPublishing @inmice.bsky.social journals.plos.org/plosone/arti...

Of course. Most of the times when something like this comes out, the issues are not really journal-specific #OverlyPensiveEditor The journals that are big - and open - often get really bad rap... 1/

Missed this piece of news earlier this summer: AAAI starts experimenting with AI reviews 4 their #AAAI-26 conference. As always, this is meant to assist & be with supervision #OverlyHonestEditor #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview #ArtificialIntelligence Don't be mistaken 1/ aaai.org/aaai-launche...

New @everythinghertz.com episode covers an interesting idea of a pop-up journal. Or, you know, a monograph. You guys discovered a monograph #OverlyHonestEditor I have some boring thoughts, too...

I think this quote is both unsustainable and unsupported by the analysis in the piece. First and foremost, it portrays fraud as *consuming* science rather than merely growing alongside it. Much of the “fraud” in the paper is just metric gaming whackamole that doesn’t get read, cited or used.

Excellent thread from former Science EiC about arsenic life paper #retraction. We also often ignore how the role & perception of retractions changed this century, & diversity of views on retractions between & within different communities #ScientificPublishing #ResearchIntegrity #OverlyHonestEditor

I mean, you can reveal things about yourself to the editor. Would only do if you trust them tho. Should not matter for how they handle your concerns but * sometimes* can give more context/credibility. Also, paradoxically, I can protect you better if I know whom I'm protecting #OverlyHelpfulEditor

Ah, but is it even worth attending if you don't have Editor Cat-zhang there, acting as a shill for Big Publons? #OverlyUnscrupulousEditor #ScientificPublishing

I think every paper should start with authors expounding on their view on the essence of knowledge #OverlyHonestEditor Otherwise, why are we even here? #ScientificPublishing

I think every paper should start with authors expounding on their view on the essence of knowledge #OverlyHonestEditor Otherwise, why are we even here? #ScientificPublishing

Editor Cat-ttacharya is reading the news coming out of NIH and can't decide if Jay is a well-meaning idiot or a smart villain #OverlyConfusedEditor I guess it depends how you define your morality, which for the current administration seems to be at the very tribal level #ScientificPublishing

Editor Cat-ttacharya is reading the news coming out of NIH and can't decide if Jay is a well-meaning idiot or a smart villain #OverlyConfusedEditor I guess it depends how you define your morality, which for the current administration seems to be at the very tribal level #ScientificPublishing

What I take most from the event is the understanding that metaresearch is an explicitly interventionist and inherently interdisciplinary approach to exploring how the structures of research impact its content. It's not just about critique but about embedding this critique in our ways working.

Editor Cat-fuentes finds itself at a loss after another "it's been X+5 days since submission, your website says you make first decision on average after X days, where is my decision" email #OverlyConfusedEditor How do you politely explain what "average" means? #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview

Here are some swiftly assembled thoughts on #Metascience2025. Congratulations to the organisers. It was an excellent, full and balanced conference, bringing together many disparate strands. They threaded a complex needle really well.

Saw this, and before realising the context immediately thought, that's one sassy (or/and corrupt) editor... #ScientificPublishing #OverlyHonestEditor

I just remembered that I blissfully forgot earlier that we're now officially closer to 2050 than 2000 #OverlyAgeWeatheredEditor

"de-anonymizing reviewers will fix this problem. I completely agree that if my name is going to be attached to my review, I am absolutely going to be very nice. In fact, I won't criticize anything at all." journals.biologists.com/jcs/article/...

So good from #metascience2025 I mean, I love #openscience (just check the bio), but a lot of advocacy always has the vibe of: What do we want? Transparent, rigorous, well-executed research! When do we want it? Now, or else! Who do we want to pay for all of that? *quiet backpedaling starts*

How today feels like. And that's before we consider the weather #OverlyTiredEditor

Editor Cat-mondo is yet again exasperated with papers that say "we claim X and effect on Y" only to then list limitations that "we collected the data in a way / used analytical approach / did something else naff that makes claims on X completely uninterpretable, esp. wrt Y" #OverlyHonestEditor 1/

Editor Cat-mondo is yet again exasperated with papers that say "we claim X and effect on Y" only to then list limitations that "we collected the data in a way / used analytical approach / did something else naff that makes claims on X completely uninterpretable, esp. wrt Y" #OverlyHonestEditor 1/

Debate: Journal Editors Do Not Need To Worry About Preventing Misinformation From Being Spread scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/06/24/d...

New blog post: Checking Data and Code in Repositories with Papercheck daniellakens.blogspot.com/2025/06/chec... We show how our Papercheck tool can automatically check and list files in data repositories linked to in a scientific manuscript.

Omg, repeat after me: DORA, DORA, DORA #ScientificPublishing Like, what the actual heck is happening right now (also, 🤮) #OverlyExasperatedEditor

Read, before the deluge starts! #ScientificPublishing

What is common knowledge in your field, but shocks outsiders? We're not clear on what peer review is, at all.

What is common knowledge in your field, but shocks outsiders? We're not clear on what peer review is, at all.