#metascience — Public Fediverse posts

A bruhahah over re-granting of devolved funds forces UKRI to clarify their policy : AI may *not* be used in grant proposal review

https://www.science.org/content/article/u-k-funder-uses-ai-triage-reject-grant-proposals-leaving-researchers-dismayed

Also has some general lessons on deploying AI
- people resent being taken by surprise
- when people make effort to write something, they expect a reciprocal effort in reading it.

This seems like a strong moral intuition, which is quite orthogonal to *some* of the overt functions of research funding evaluation

#metascience #academicChatter

A bruhahah over re-granting of devolved funds forces UKRI to clarify their policy : AI may *not* be used in grant proposal review

https://www.science.org/content/article/u-k-funder-uses-ai-triage-reject-grant-proposals-leaving-researchers-dismayed

Also has some general lessons on deploying AI
- people resent being taken by surprise
- when people make effort to write something, they expect a reciprocal effort in reading it.

This seems like a strong moral intuition, which is quite orthogonal to *some* of the overt functions of research funding evaluation

#metascience #academicChatter

A bruhahah over re-granting of devolved funds forces UKRI to clarify their policy : AI may *not* be used in grant proposal review

https://www.science.org/content/article/u-k-funder-uses-ai-triage-reject-grant-proposals-leaving-researchers-dismayed

Also has some general lessons on deploying AI
- people resent being taken by surprise
- when people make effort to write something, they expect a reciprocal effort in reading it.

This seems like a strong moral intuition, which is quite orthogonal to *some* of the overt functions of research funding evaluation

#metascience #academicChatter

A bruhahah over re-granting of devolved funds forces UKRI to clarify their policy : AI may *not* be used in grant proposal review

https://www.science.org/content/article/u-k-funder-uses-ai-triage-reject-grant-proposals-leaving-researchers-dismayed

Also has some general lessons on deploying AI
- people resent being taken by surprise
- when people make effort to write something, they expect a reciprocal effort in reading it.

This seems like a strong moral intuition, which is quite orthogonal to *some* of the overt functions of research funding evaluation

#metascience #academicChatter

☕Grab your cup!
October is packed with ReproducibiliTea sessions!

October Lineup:

Fri, 2 Oct (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld (Online)
Why It Is (Probably) Not Your Fault if Your Studies Do Not Work Out (Discussion of Meimoun & Lakens, 2026)
https://lnkd.in/d2qJxqua

Mon, 5 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | Geneva (Hybrid: Uni Mail & Online)
Where to Publish? Highlighting non-profit & society-based open access journals (with Nicolas Clairis & Thibault Latrille)
Contact: [email protected]

Wed, 7 Oct (14:00–15:00 UTC) | Galway (Hybrid: Hardiman Research Building & Online)
Qualitative Data Sharing with Care: Open research in the humanities & social sciences (MORPHSS project)
https://lnkd.in/dyEWyQAJ

Wed, 7 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | UCL / UNIL (Online)
Thriving in the Leadership Job You Weren’t (Really) Trained For (with Prof. Jennifer M. Heemstra)
https://lnkd.in/eRQCutHb

Thu, 8 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
The Long Road to Trust: Why AI Needs Rigorous Validation
https://lnkd.in/exRKS4Bu

Wed, 14 Oct (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine (Online)
Social Epistemology: Openness and Inequity in Scientific Research
https://lnkd.in/dkMfhajq

Thu, 15 Oct (14:15–15:00 CEST) | Oslo (Hybrid)
PhD Students’ Experience with Pre-registrations: What’s realistic for early-career researchers?
https://lnkd.in/drhbZAUE

Tue, 20 Oct (14:00 UK time) | UEA (MS Teams)
Trowels to Terabytes: Accessibility & Re-Use of Heritage Data at the ADS (with Dr. Nicky Garland)
https://lnkd.in/euUWYERu

Thu, 22 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
Rembrandt & Rubens Revisited
https://lnkd.in/eXX_TWmH

Thu, 29 Oct (16:00 Melbourne time) | Melbourne (Online/Hybrid)
Monthly meeting (Topic TBC)
http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

Find an initiative near you or join an online session from anywhere in the world: reproducibilitea.org

#ReproducibiliTea #OpenScience #OpenResearch #MetaScience #ResearchIntegrity

☕Grab your cup!
October is packed with ReproducibiliTea sessions!

October Lineup:

Fri, 2 Oct (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld (Online)
Why It Is (Probably) Not Your Fault if Your Studies Do Not Work Out (Discussion of Meimoun & Lakens, 2026)
https://lnkd.in/d2qJxqua

Mon, 5 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | Geneva (Hybrid: Uni Mail & Online)
Where to Publish? Highlighting non-profit & society-based open access journals (with Nicolas Clairis & Thibault Latrille)
Contact: [email protected]

Wed, 7 Oct (14:00–15:00 UTC) | Galway (Hybrid: Hardiman Research Building & Online)
Qualitative Data Sharing with Care: Open research in the humanities & social sciences (MORPHSS project)
https://lnkd.in/dyEWyQAJ

Wed, 7 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | UCL / UNIL (Online)
Thriving in the Leadership Job You Weren’t (Really) Trained For (with Prof. Jennifer M. Heemstra)
https://lnkd.in/eRQCutHb

Thu, 8 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
The Long Road to Trust: Why AI Needs Rigorous Validation
https://lnkd.in/exRKS4Bu

Wed, 14 Oct (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine (Online)
Social Epistemology: Openness and Inequity in Scientific Research
https://lnkd.in/dkMfhajq

Thu, 15 Oct (14:15–15:00 CEST) | Oslo (Hybrid)
PhD Students’ Experience with Pre-registrations: What’s realistic for early-career researchers?
https://lnkd.in/drhbZAUE

Tue, 20 Oct (14:00 UK time) | UEA (MS Teams)
Trowels to Terabytes: Accessibility & Re-Use of Heritage Data at the ADS (with Dr. Nicky Garland)
https://lnkd.in/euUWYERu

Thu, 22 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
Rembrandt & Rubens Revisited
https://lnkd.in/eXX_TWmH

Thu, 29 Oct (16:00 Melbourne time) | Melbourne (Online/Hybrid)
Monthly meeting (Topic TBC)
http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

Find an initiative near you or join an online session from anywhere in the world: reproducibilitea.org

#ReproducibiliTea #OpenScience #OpenResearch #MetaScience #ResearchIntegrity

☕Grab your cup!
October is packed with ReproducibiliTea sessions!

October Lineup:

Fri, 2 Oct (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld (Online)
Why It Is (Probably) Not Your Fault if Your Studies Do Not Work Out (Discussion of Meimoun & Lakens, 2026)
https://lnkd.in/d2qJxqua

Mon, 5 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | Geneva (Hybrid: Uni Mail & Online)
Where to Publish? Highlighting non-profit & society-based open access journals (with Nicolas Clairis & Thibault Latrille)
Contact: [email protected]

Wed, 7 Oct (14:00–15:00 UTC) | Galway (Hybrid: Hardiman Research Building & Online)
Qualitative Data Sharing with Care: Open research in the humanities & social sciences (MORPHSS project)
https://lnkd.in/dyEWyQAJ

Wed, 7 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | UCL / UNIL (Online)
Thriving in the Leadership Job You Weren’t (Really) Trained For (with Prof. Jennifer M. Heemstra)
https://lnkd.in/eRQCutHb

Thu, 8 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
The Long Road to Trust: Why AI Needs Rigorous Validation
https://lnkd.in/exRKS4Bu

Wed, 14 Oct (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine (Online)
Social Epistemology: Openness and Inequity in Scientific Research
https://lnkd.in/dkMfhajq

Thu, 15 Oct (14:15–15:00 CEST) | Oslo (Hybrid)
PhD Students’ Experience with Pre-registrations: What’s realistic for early-career researchers?
https://lnkd.in/drhbZAUE

Tue, 20 Oct (14:00 UK time) | UEA (MS Teams)
Trowels to Terabytes: Accessibility & Re-Use of Heritage Data at the ADS (with Dr. Nicky Garland)
https://lnkd.in/euUWYERu

Thu, 22 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
Rembrandt & Rubens Revisited
https://lnkd.in/eXX_TWmH

Thu, 29 Oct (16:00 Melbourne time) | Melbourne (Online/Hybrid)
Monthly meeting (Topic TBC)
http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

Find an initiative near you or join an online session from anywhere in the world: reproducibilitea.org

#ReproducibiliTea #OpenScience #OpenResearch #MetaScience #ResearchIntegrity

☕Grab your cup!
October is packed with ReproducibiliTea sessions!

October Lineup:

Fri, 2 Oct (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld (Online)
Why It Is (Probably) Not Your Fault if Your Studies Do Not Work Out (Discussion of Meimoun & Lakens, 2026)
https://lnkd.in/d2qJxqua

Mon, 5 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | Geneva (Hybrid: Uni Mail & Online)
Where to Publish? Highlighting non-profit & society-based open access journals (with Nicolas Clairis & Thibault Latrille)
Contact: [email protected]

Wed, 7 Oct (14:00–15:00 UTC) | Galway (Hybrid: Hardiman Research Building & Online)
Qualitative Data Sharing with Care: Open research in the humanities & social sciences (MORPHSS project)
https://lnkd.in/dyEWyQAJ

Wed, 7 Oct (16:00–17:00 CEST) | UCL / UNIL (Online)
Thriving in the Leadership Job You Weren’t (Really) Trained For (with Prof. Jennifer M. Heemstra)
https://lnkd.in/eRQCutHb

Thu, 8 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
The Long Road to Trust: Why AI Needs Rigorous Validation
https://lnkd.in/exRKS4Bu

Wed, 14 Oct (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine (Online)
Social Epistemology: Openness and Inequity in Scientific Research
https://lnkd.in/dkMfhajq

Thu, 15 Oct (14:15–15:00 CEST) | Oslo (Hybrid)
PhD Students’ Experience with Pre-registrations: What’s realistic for early-career researchers?
https://lnkd.in/drhbZAUE

Tue, 20 Oct (14:00 UK time) | UEA (MS Teams)
Trowels to Terabytes: Accessibility & Re-Use of Heritage Data at the ADS (with Dr. Nicky Garland)
https://lnkd.in/euUWYERu

Thu, 22 Oct (16:30–17:30 CEST) | UniBasel (Online)
Rembrandt & Rubens Revisited
https://lnkd.in/eXX_TWmH

Thu, 29 Oct (16:00 Melbourne time) | Melbourne (Online/Hybrid)
Monthly meeting (Topic TBC)
http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

Find an initiative near you or join an online session from anywhere in the world: reproducibilitea.org

#ReproducibiliTea #OpenScience #OpenResearch #MetaScience #ResearchIntegrity

@Steve_Lindsay

[email protected] - "Can Google Scholar citation counts be given credence these days? There have always been valid grounds for criticizing citation counts, but I'm wondering if sloppification has greatly amplified the problems.  Thoughts?"

#MetaScience #citations

@Steve_Lindsay

[email protected] - "Can Google Scholar citation counts be given credence these days? There have always been valid grounds for criticizing citation counts, but I'm wondering if sloppification has greatly amplified the problems.  Thoughts?"

#MetaScience #citations

@Steve_Lindsay

[email protected] - "Can Google Scholar citation counts be given credence these days? There have always been valid grounds for criticizing citation counts, but I'm wondering if sloppification has greatly amplified the problems.  Thoughts?"

#MetaScience #citations

@Steve_Lindsay

[email protected] - "Can Google Scholar citation counts be given credence these days? There have always been valid grounds for criticizing citation counts, but I'm wondering if sloppification has greatly amplified the problems.  Thoughts?"

#MetaScience #citations

ACL conference moving to requiring you provide reviews if you want to submit

https://www.aclweb.org/portal/content/acl-sustainable-reviewing-policy

Signalling theory take: AI lowered the cost of submission, so already creaking peer review commons fell over. Requiring reviews introduces a new cost on authors, meaning submission is more likely to be an honest signal (of having something worth saying)

#metascience

ACL conference moving to requiring you provide reviews if you want to submit

https://www.aclweb.org/portal/content/acl-sustainable-reviewing-policy

Signalling theory take: AI lowered the cost of submission, so already creaking peer review commons fell over. Requiring reviews introduces a new cost on authors, meaning submission is more likely to be an honest signal (of having something worth saying)

#metascience

ACL conference moving to requiring you provide reviews if you want to submit

https://www.aclweb.org/portal/content/acl-sustainable-reviewing-policy

Signalling theory take: AI lowered the cost of submission, so already creaking peer review commons fell over. Requiring reviews introduces a new cost on authors, meaning submission is more likely to be an honest signal (of having something worth saying)

#metascience

ACL conference moving to requiring you provide reviews if you want to submit

https://www.aclweb.org/portal/content/acl-sustainable-reviewing-policy

Signalling theory take: AI lowered the cost of submission, so already creaking peer review commons fell over. Requiring reviews introduces a new cost on authors, meaning submission is more likely to be an honest signal (of having something worth saying)

#metascience

A conference with 17,000 reviewers randomised the permissions on AI use (none vs some). Decisions didn't change, but the permissive group turned in longer reviews.

There was, however, "substantial noncompliance", with reviewers in both groups using LLMs for reviews in ways they were expressly forbidden

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.19420

Kim et al (2026)

#metascience

A conference with 17,000 reviewers randomised the permissions on AI use (none vs some). Decisions didn't change, but the permissive group turned in longer reviews.

There was, however, "substantial noncompliance", with reviewers in both groups using LLMs for reviews in ways they were expressly forbidden

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.19420

Kim et al (2026)

#metascience

A conference with 17,000 reviewers randomised the permissions on AI use (none vs some). Decisions didn't change, but the permissive group turned in longer reviews.

There was, however, "substantial noncompliance", with reviewers in both groups using LLMs for reviews in ways they were expressly forbidden

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.19420

Kim et al (2026)

#metascience

A conference with 17,000 reviewers randomised the permissions on AI use (none vs some). Decisions didn't change, but the permissive group turned in longer reviews.

There was, however, "substantial noncompliance", with reviewers in both groups using LLMs for reviews in ways they were expressly forbidden

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.19420

Kim et al (2026)

#metascience

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026

“A decade on & decades ahead”

🌟 Spotlight: Keynote Speakers & Closing Remarks

We are thrilled to spotlight our opening and closing keynotes.

🎤 Opening Keynote:

🔹 10:10 CEST (40 min) “Community Efforts Enable Reproducibility”

Marta Topor (Linköping University, Sweden)

🎤 Closing Keynote:

🔹 17:55 CEST (40 min) “Everything old is new again: the deepened importance of reproducibility in the age of AI”

Kirstie Whitaker (Berkeley Institute for Data Science / BIDS, US)

🔹 18:35 CEST | Closing Words

👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and explore speaker bios, the complete schedule, and session links on our website: 🔗

https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026

We can't wait to see you there! ☕

#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Keynote #OpenScience #Reproducibility #MetaScience #ResearchCommunity

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026

“A decade on & decades ahead”

🌟 Spotlight: Keynote Speakers & Closing Remarks

We are thrilled to spotlight our opening and closing keynotes.

🎤 Opening Keynote:

🔹 10:10 CEST (40 min) “Community Efforts Enable Reproducibility”

Marta Topor (Linköping University, Sweden)

🎤 Closing Keynote:

🔹 17:55 CEST (40 min) “Everything old is new again: the deepened importance of reproducibility in the age of AI”

Kirstie Whitaker (Berkeley Institute for Data Science / BIDS, US)

🔹 18:35 CEST | Closing Words

👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and explore speaker bios, the complete schedule, and session links on our website: 🔗

https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026

We can't wait to see you there! ☕

#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Keynote #OpenScience #Reproducibility #MetaScience #ResearchCommunity

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026

“A decade on & decades ahead”

🌟 Spotlight: Keynote Speakers & Closing Remarks

We are thrilled to spotlight our opening and closing keynotes.

🎤 Opening Keynote:

🔹 10:10 CEST (40 min) “Community Efforts Enable Reproducibility”

Marta Topor (Linköping University, Sweden)

🎤 Closing Keynote:

🔹 17:55 CEST (40 min) “Everything old is new again: the deepened importance of reproducibility in the age of AI”

Kirstie Whitaker (Berkeley Institute for Data Science / BIDS, US)

🔹 18:35 CEST | Closing Words

👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and explore speaker bios, the complete schedule, and session links on our website: 🔗

https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026

We can't wait to see you there! ☕

#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Keynote #OpenScience #Reproducibility #MetaScience #ResearchCommunity

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026

“A decade on & decades ahead”

🌟 Spotlight: Keynote Speakers & Closing Remarks

We are thrilled to spotlight our opening and closing keynotes.

🎤 Opening Keynote:

🔹 10:10 CEST (40 min) “Community Efforts Enable Reproducibility”

Marta Topor (Linköping University, Sweden)

🎤 Closing Keynote:

🔹 17:55 CEST (40 min) “Everything old is new again: the deepened importance of reproducibility in the age of AI”

Kirstie Whitaker (Berkeley Institute for Data Science / BIDS, US)

🔹 18:35 CEST | Closing Words

👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and explore speaker bios, the complete schedule, and session links on our website: 🔗

https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026

We can't wait to see you there! ☕

#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Keynote #OpenScience #Reproducibility #MetaScience #ResearchCommunity

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026
“A decade on & decades ahead”
Lunch Break & Parallel Journal Clubs | 14:10–16:10 CEST
Grab a bite and a warm cup of tea, then join us for interactive discussions!
⇆ Both journal clubs run at the same time in separate rooms — you are free to hop between them.
🌟 Afternoon Schedule:
14:10–15:10 | Lunch Break (60 min)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club A (Parallel Room A) “Good Science Is More Than Reproducible: Methods, Statistics, and Responsible Interpretation”
Host: Mircea Zloteanu (StatsTea · King’s College London, UK)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club B (Parallel Room B) “Journal club & experience-sharing session: Ten simple rules for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club”
Host: Lianne Wolsink (ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee · Ruhr University Bochum, Germany)
👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and view the full program, parallel room details, and speaker lineup on our website:
🔗 https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026
#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Reproducibility #OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #MetaScience #JournalClub

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026
“A decade on & decades ahead”
Lunch Break & Parallel Journal Clubs | 14:10–16:10 CEST
Grab a bite and a warm cup of tea, then join us for interactive discussions!
⇆ Both journal clubs run at the same time in separate rooms — you are free to hop between them.
🌟 Afternoon Schedule:
14:10–15:10 | Lunch Break (60 min)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club A (Parallel Room A) “Good Science Is More Than Reproducible: Methods, Statistics, and Responsible Interpretation”
Host: Mircea Zloteanu (StatsTea · King’s College London, UK)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club B (Parallel Room B) “Journal club & experience-sharing session: Ten simple rules for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club”
Host: Lianne Wolsink (ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee · Ruhr University Bochum, Germany)
👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and view the full program, parallel room details, and speaker lineup on our website:
🔗 https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026
#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Reproducibility #OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #MetaScience #JournalClub

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026
“A decade on & decades ahead”
Lunch Break & Parallel Journal Clubs | 14:10–16:10 CEST
Grab a bite and a warm cup of tea, then join us for interactive discussions!
⇆ Both journal clubs run at the same time in separate rooms — you are free to hop between them.
🌟 Afternoon Schedule:
14:10–15:10 | Lunch Break (60 min)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club A (Parallel Room A) “Good Science Is More Than Reproducible: Methods, Statistics, and Responsible Interpretation”
Host: Mircea Zloteanu (StatsTea · King’s College London, UK)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club B (Parallel Room B) “Journal club & experience-sharing session: Ten simple rules for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club”
Host: Lianne Wolsink (ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee · Ruhr University Bochum, Germany)
👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and view the full program, parallel room details, and speaker lineup on our website:
🔗 https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026
#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Reproducibility #OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #MetaScience #JournalClub

🎉 ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference | 25 September 2026
“A decade on & decades ahead”
Lunch Break & Parallel Journal Clubs | 14:10–16:10 CEST
Grab a bite and a warm cup of tea, then join us for interactive discussions!
⇆ Both journal clubs run at the same time in separate rooms — you are free to hop between them.
🌟 Afternoon Schedule:
14:10–15:10 | Lunch Break (60 min)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club A (Parallel Room A) “Good Science Is More Than Reproducible: Methods, Statistics, and Responsible Interpretation”
Host: Mircea Zloteanu (StatsTea · King’s College London, UK)
🔹 15:10–16:10 | Journal Club B (Parallel Room B) “Journal club & experience-sharing session: Ten simple rules for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club”
Host: Lianne Wolsink (ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee · Ruhr University Bochum, Germany)
👉 Register for the ReproducibiliTea 2026 Conference and view the full program, parallel room details, and speaker lineup on our website:
🔗 https://reproducibilitea.org/conference2026
#ReproducibiliTea2026 #ReproducibiliTea #Reproducibility #OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #MetaScience #JournalClub

Gender and disciplinary differences in grant proposal peer review: Content and sentiment in 39,280 reports

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0352900

#Metascience from the @snsf_ch data team

Gender and disciplinary differences in grant proposal peer review: Content and sentiment in 39,280 reports

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0352900

#Metascience from the @snsf_ch data team

Gender and disciplinary differences in grant proposal peer review: Content and sentiment in 39,280 reports

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0352900

#Metascience from the @snsf_ch data team

Gender and disciplinary differences in grant proposal peer review: Content and sentiment in 39,280 reports

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0352900

#Metascience from the @snsf_ch data team

A small idea that started as a letter to the editor, but the reviewers were not convinced. 🙂 If lexical markers of LLM-assisted writing change as users and models adapt, can we really use them for longitudinal measurement?

I call this the Marker Drift Problem. No large empirical study (yet). For now, a short preprint putting the problem on the table:

:doi: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/xs64q_v1

#Metascience #GenAI #LLM #ScholarlyCommunication #ResearchIntegrity #preprint

A small idea that started as a letter to the editor, but the reviewers were not convinced. 🙂 If lexical markers of LLM-assisted writing change as users and models adapt, can we really use them for longitudinal measurement?

I call this the Marker Drift Problem. No large empirical study (yet). For now, a short preprint putting the problem on the table:

:doi: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/xs64q_v1

#Metascience #GenAI #LLM #ScholarlyCommunication #ResearchIntegrity #preprint

A small idea that started as a letter to the editor, but the reviewers were not convinced. 🙂 If lexical markers of LLM-assisted writing change as users and models adapt, can we really use them for longitudinal measurement?

I call this the Marker Drift Problem. No large empirical study (yet). For now, a short preprint putting the problem on the table:

:doi: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/xs64q_v1

#Metascience #GenAI #LLM #ScholarlyCommunication #ResearchIntegrity #preprint

A small idea that started as a letter to the editor, but the reviewers were not convinced. 🙂 If lexical markers of LLM-assisted writing change as users and models adapt, can we really use them for longitudinal measurement?

I call this the Marker Drift Problem. No large empirical study (yet). For now, a short preprint putting the problem on the table:

:doi: https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/xs64q_v1

#Metascience #GenAI #LLM #ScholarlyCommunication #ResearchIntegrity #preprint

Blogged about how what is possible now with AI shows how poorly served we have been by tech up to this point https://idiolect.org.uk/notes/2026/09/10/actual-personalisation/

(and a bonus link to a #Metascience project I'm working on)

Blogged about how what is possible now with AI shows how poorly served we have been by tech up to this point https://idiolect.org.uk/notes/2026/09/10/actual-personalisation/

(and a bonus link to a #Metascience project I'm working on)

Blogged about how what is possible now with AI shows how poorly served we have been by tech up to this point https://idiolect.org.uk/notes/2026/09/10/actual-personalisation/

(and a bonus link to a #Metascience project I'm working on)

Blogged about how what is possible now with AI shows how poorly served we have been by tech up to this point https://idiolect.org.uk/notes/2026/09/10/actual-personalisation/

(and a bonus link to a #Metascience project I'm working on)

New #metascience…

🔸 Is Replication Rare?

🔸 Registered Report Timelines

🔸 Open Science and Trust

🔸 P-Hacking and Publication Bias

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/is-replication-rare-registered-report

New #metascience…

🔸 Is Replication Rare?

🔸 Registered Report Timelines

🔸 Open Science and Trust

🔸 P-Hacking and Publication Bias

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/is-replication-rare-registered-report

New #metascience…

🔸 Is Replication Rare?

🔸 Registered Report Timelines

🔸 Open Science and Trust

🔸 P-Hacking and Publication Bias

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/is-replication-rare-registered-report

New #metascience…

🔸 Is Replication Rare?

🔸 Registered Report Timelines

🔸 Open Science and Trust

🔸 P-Hacking and Publication Bias

https://markrubin.substack.com/p/is-replication-rare-registered-report

We're serving a full pot of ReproducibiliTea this September:

4 Sept (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld: Discussing van Rooij & Baggio’s "Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science”

https://burst.pages.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/burst/

9 Sept (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine: "Building predictive models without negative results: Trained on success, blind to failure"

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSetsz8iWnbvgz0JfmHNNnITGw0dJxoMwZqBsYPsfVl5XDO6lA/viewform

24 Sept (16:00 AEST) | Melbourne Blend: “Topic TBC”

http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

25 Sept | OUR FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

Spilling the ReproducibiliTea: A Decade On & Decades Ahead

Free & online via Zoom
Join us for research integrity, live journal club sessions, and speakers worldwide!

👉 Register: https://forms.gle/KgemQ3gM2fEezYLv7

#OpenScience #Reproducibility #Metascience #ReproducibiliTea

We're serving a full pot of ReproducibiliTea this September:

4 Sept (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld: Discussing van Rooij & Baggio’s "Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science”

https://burst.pages.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/burst/

9 Sept (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine: "Building predictive models without negative results: Trained on success, blind to failure"

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSetsz8iWnbvgz0JfmHNNnITGw0dJxoMwZqBsYPsfVl5XDO6lA/viewform

24 Sept (16:00 AEST) | Melbourne Blend: “Topic TBC”

http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

25 Sept | OUR FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

Spilling the ReproducibiliTea: A Decade On & Decades Ahead

Free & online via Zoom
Join us for research integrity, live journal club sessions, and speakers worldwide!

👉 Register: https://forms.gle/KgemQ3gM2fEezYLv7

#OpenScience #Reproducibility #Metascience #ReproducibiliTea

We're serving a full pot of ReproducibiliTea this September:

4 Sept (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld: Discussing van Rooij & Baggio’s "Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science”

https://burst.pages.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/burst/

9 Sept (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine: "Building predictive models without negative results: Trained on success, blind to failure"

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSetsz8iWnbvgz0JfmHNNnITGw0dJxoMwZqBsYPsfVl5XDO6lA/viewform

24 Sept (16:00 AEST) | Melbourne Blend: “Topic TBC”

http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

25 Sept | OUR FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

Spilling the ReproducibiliTea: A Decade On & Decades Ahead

Free & online via Zoom
Join us for research integrity, live journal club sessions, and speakers worldwide!

👉 Register: https://forms.gle/KgemQ3gM2fEezYLv7

#OpenScience #Reproducibility #Metascience #ReproducibiliTea

We're serving a full pot of ReproducibiliTea this September:

4 Sept (12:00 CET) | Bielefeld: Discussing van Rooij & Baggio’s "Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science”

https://burst.pages.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/burst/

9 Sept (12:00 CET) | Lund Biomedicine: "Building predictive models without negative results: Trained on success, blind to failure"

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSetsz8iWnbvgz0JfmHNNnITGw0dJxoMwZqBsYPsfVl5XDO6lA/viewform

24 Sept (16:00 AEST) | Melbourne Blend: “Topic TBC”

http://shorturl.at/mELZ3

25 Sept | OUR FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

Spilling the ReproducibiliTea: A Decade On & Decades Ahead

Free & online via Zoom
Join us for research integrity, live journal club sessions, and speakers worldwide!

👉 Register: https://forms.gle/KgemQ3gM2fEezYLv7

#OpenScience #Reproducibility #Metascience #ReproducibiliTea

New #preprint „How Much Replication Is Enough? Balancing Novelty And Replication In A Truth-Driven Evolutionary Simulation“ (first authored by Kaitlyn Harper @[email protected] in the Meta-Rep project).

In the paper we ask: given limited scientific resources, how much should we be allocating to replication vs original research? We use an agent based model of cultural evolution to reveal the ideal allocation of resources under a variety of scientific environments and conditions.

A key takeaway: Replication seems to act like a corrective response to problems in the research environment, rather than a universal good.

https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/x7n9h_v1

#MetaScience #Replication #ABM

New #preprint „How Much Replication Is Enough? Balancing Novelty And Replication In A Truth-Driven Evolutionary Simulation“ (first authored by Kaitlyn Harper @[email protected] in the Meta-Rep project).

In the paper we ask: given limited scientific resources, how much should we be allocating to replication vs original research? We use an agent based model of cultural evolution to reveal the ideal allocation of resources under a variety of scientific environments and conditions.

A key takeaway: Replication seems to act like a corrective response to problems in the research environment, rather than a universal good.

https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/x7n9h_v1

#MetaScience #Replication #ABM

New #preprint „How Much Replication Is Enough? Balancing Novelty And Replication In A Truth-Driven Evolutionary Simulation“ (first authored by Kaitlyn Harper @[email protected] in the Meta-Rep project).

In the paper we ask: given limited scientific resources, how much should we be allocating to replication vs original research? We use an agent based model of cultural evolution to reveal the ideal allocation of resources under a variety of scientific environments and conditions.

A key takeaway: Replication seems to act like a corrective response to problems in the research environment, rather than a universal good.

https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/x7n9h_v1

#MetaScience #Replication #ABM

New #preprint „How Much Replication Is Enough? Balancing Novelty And Replication In A Truth-Driven Evolutionary Simulation“ (first authored by Kaitlyn Harper @[email protected] in the Meta-Rep project).

In the paper we ask: given limited scientific resources, how much should we be allocating to replication vs original research? We use an agent based model of cultural evolution to reveal the ideal allocation of resources under a variety of scientific environments and conditions.

A key takeaway: Replication seems to act like a corrective response to problems in the research environment, rather than a universal good.

https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/x7n9h_v1

#MetaScience #Replication #ABM

If you don’t have access, you can read the article in your browser via this link: https://rdcu.be/fCrll.

And if you’d like a PDF version, head over to RG: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/413676790_Poor_bibliometric_studies_do_not_make_bibliometrics_poor_science_a_response_to_Ellegaard

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience #BibliometricAnalysis #PeerReview

If you don’t have access, you can read the article in your browser via this link: https://rdcu.be/fCrll.

And if you’d like a PDF version, head over to RG: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/413676790_Poor_bibliometric_studies_do_not_make_bibliometrics_poor_science_a_response_to_Ellegaard

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience #BibliometricAnalysis #PeerReview

If you don’t have access, you can read the article in your browser via this link: https://rdcu.be/fCrll.

And if you’d like a PDF version, head over to RG: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/413676790_Poor_bibliometric_studies_do_not_make_bibliometrics_poor_science_a_response_to_Ellegaard

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience #BibliometricAnalysis #PeerReview

If you don’t have access, you can read the article in your browser via this link: https://rdcu.be/fCrll.

And if you’d like a PDF version, head over to RG: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/413676790_Poor_bibliometric_studies_do_not_make_bibliometrics_poor_science_a_response_to_Ellegaard

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience #BibliometricAnalysis #PeerReview

My new paper in Scientometrics: Poor bibliometric studies do not make bibliometrics poor science.

:doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05791-y

Yes, there is plenty of superficial, software-driven bibliometric research. But the problem is research quality – not bibliometrics as a scientific method.

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience

My new paper in Scientometrics: Poor bibliometric studies do not make bibliometrics poor science.

:doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05791-y

Yes, there is plenty of superficial, software-driven bibliometric research. But the problem is research quality – not bibliometrics as a scientific method.

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience

My new paper in Scientometrics: Poor bibliometric studies do not make bibliometrics poor science.

:doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05791-y

Yes, there is plenty of superficial, software-driven bibliometric research. But the problem is research quality – not bibliometrics as a scientific method.

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience

My new paper in Scientometrics: Poor bibliometric studies do not make bibliometrics poor science.

:doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-026-05791-y

Yes, there is plenty of superficial, software-driven bibliometric research. But the problem is research quality – not bibliometrics as a scientific method.

#Bibliometrics #Scientometrics #ResearchQuality #MetaScience