home.social

#openpeerreview — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #openpeerreview, aggregated by home.social.

  1. PREreview @[email protected] ·

    ¡Ya se acerca la #PeerReviewWeek 2026 y las actividades protagonizadas por miembros de nuestra comunidad se replican en todo el mundo!

    Les invitamos a participar de la conferencia "Revisión por pares abierta en la práctica: PREreview como un laboratorio de innovación para la evaluación científica", a cargo de @rosariorogel PREreview Champion 2025 y Mentora 2026. Organizada por la Corporación Universitaria para el Desarrollo de Internet y la Red Mexicana de Repositorios Institucionales

    📆 Cuándo: 14 de septiembre, de 11 a 13 h UTC-6
    📌 Dónde: virtual, por plataforma Zoom

    👉 Más información e inscripciones: cudi.edu.mx/eventos/revision-p

    #PRW2026 #OpenPeerReview #CienciaAbierta #RevisionAbierta

    #revisionabierta #cienciaabierta #openpeerreview #prw2026 #peerreviewweek
  2. Emilia Jarochowska 🇺🇦🌱 @[email protected] ·

    Are you in #EarthScience and interested in improving #AcademicPublishing options in your field? I am preparing a proposal for a PCI Eart Sciences, which would be part of peercommunityin.org/ family of journals. The digital infrastructure and brand are there, i have benefited as an author and as an editor from PCI Paleo and I can attest to the high quality and robustness of this platform and process. Being involved doesn’t actually require committing a lot of your time, as it takes years to establish a new journal. At this point it is more about launching it and making it visible, so I am primarily looking for mid-to senior-career collaborators who can help steer publications towards this venue. Especially if you’re in the field of #EnvironmentalScience, #Tectonics, #Petrology, #Mineralogy, #PhysicalGeography, #Hydrogeology, #EarthSystemScience and #Climate you are most welcome as these fields are underrepresented in my network. You can contribute by becoming an editor, pledging a submission, or helping recruit a BigName in your field (maybe that’s you?). Please have a look at peercommunityin.org/ or get in touch. #OpenAccess #OpenScience #geoscience #OpenPeerReview

    #earthscience #academicpublishing #environmentalscience #tectonics #petrology #mineralogy
  3. Boud @[email protected] ·

    Does #OpenPeerReview (here #F1000Research ) give editors the right to euphemise reviews? See [1] + my submitted review [2].

    The editor wants to *completely remove* these 2 sentences:

    "This paper is not a research paper in physics/astronomy/cosmology. I will not review further revisions of this submitted text."

    I completely fail to see how the editor can justify this removal (+ I disagree with the other changes).

    @academicchatter

    [1] f1000research.com/articles/11-

    [2] codeberg.org/boud/open_science

    #openpeerreview #f1000research
  4. Peter Cock @[email protected] ·

    My first first-author paper in a while, "THAPBI PICT—a fast, cautious, and accurate metabarcoding analysis pipeline" doi.org/10.7717/peerj.15648 with @widdowquinn etc (rest not on Mastodon yet).

    Initially up as a preprint on biorxiv, now accepted on #PeerJ with #OpenPeerReview (2 of 3 reviewers waived anonymity), #OpenSource on GitHub github.com/peterjc/thapbi-pict

    I know #ThapbiPict is bit verbose, but no search engine confusion to worry about as with all to many #bioinformatics tools!

    #bioinformatics #thapbipict #opensource #openpeerreview #peerj
  5. Boud @[email protected] ·

    #F1000Research aimed at #OpenPeerReview but is utterly failing. Sending a reminder just one week after a first request for a review (on version 2 of a text), and then saying nothing - effectively refusing to publish the review - for *six months* despite two reminders defeats the whole idea of open peer review.

    #Qeios seems to be doing the opposite - after publishing a review immediately, it clarifies by email that it's a *preprint* server.

    @academicchatter

    [1] codeberg.org/boud/open_science

    #qeios #openpeerreview #f1000research
  6. Boud @[email protected] ·

    @academicchatter

    Any opinions on #Qeios [0][1] for #OpenPeerReview? Columbia Uni Mailman SchPublicHealth [2] and NYT [3] seem to take it seriously. I'm rather annoyed at #F1000Research , which pressured me for a fast report on v2 of a paper but after 5 months and several reminders hasn't published my review of v2 [4].

    Qeios sounds serious. Is it?

    [0] qeios.com/publishing-policy

    [1] qeios.com/recent-articles

    [2] publichealth.columbia.edu/news

    [3] nytimes.com/2022/01/28/opinion

    [4] f1000research.com/articles/11-

    #f1000research #openpeerreview #qeios
  7. Boud @[email protected] ·

    @dasaptaerwin

    #F1000Research is not going to get many reviewers for its #OpenPeerReview system if after two and a half months, a review of version 2 of a paper is still not published:

    f1000research.com/articles/11-

    Receipt of my second review was confirmed by email on 6 Feb 2023 ...

    #F1000 had a nice idea, but currently it doesn't seem to be working.

    #OpenScience

    framapiaf.org/@boud/1086694741

    #openscience #f1000 #openpeerreview #f1000research
  8. Boud @[email protected] ·

    @cartographer @stephenserjeant @dasaptaerwin

    #F1000Research [1] has an interesting approach to #OpenPeerReview [2], in which preprints are called "published"; justification: once "published", an article rejected by reviewers cannot be submitted to another journal (but may be revised+resubmitted). In principle, this encourages reviewers to reject papers constructively, treating the authors respectfully [3].

    [1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F1000_%2

    [2] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_pee

    [3] f1000research.com/articles/11-

    #openpeerreview #f1000research