-
Recent Posts
Categories
Archives
Twitter Updates
- The infection rate in Australia dips under 0.1 (measured by new infections per existing cases 5 days previous). Th… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 17 minutes ago
- The members of @qaecology are awesome. #justsayin twitter.com/qaecology/stat… 11 hours ago
- RT @ManuSaunders: We're counting autumn #ozpollinators again! Australia's original pollinator #citizenscience project is on from 12-19 Apri… 11 hours ago
- RT @qaecology: The many interpretations of "fancy dress" in todays lab meeting. https://t.co/Aqcx905qp4 16 hours ago
- Adjacent tweets in twitter timelines are sometimes humorous, but not this one. It makes me sad - for my American fr… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 18 hours ago
- RT @j_mccaw: This is a rather confronting read, but explores the broader issue humanity is faced with. The 'short, sharp, return to normal'… 19 hours ago
- For this weeks' virtual @qaecology lab meeting we have gone with fancy dress... https://t.co/al3QbadsWV 21 hours ago
- RT @TheScrogster: Come and work at ARI. We have a 3-year Science Leader position open at the moment. Applications close 9 April. https://t.… 22 hours ago
Links
Blogroll
Scientific Societies
Journals
Tag Archives: open science
Anonymity and peer review
The world of peer review is badly broken, at least according to the blogosphere. Anonymity of reviewers could lead to poorer reviews because reviewers remain unaccountable. Consequently, fully open reviews are used at some journals such as F1000Research. In addition … Continue reading
Posted in Communication
Tagged anonymity, double blind, Dr Isis, F1000Research, Michael McCarthy, open peer review, open science, peer review, revenge, vindictive
7 Comments
