Reproducible Quantitative Methods
Lesson 15
Topics and Resources
-
Special Guest
You may recall Rik Smith-Unna was to be our special guest back in week 9, but technical difficulties prevailed. Let's give this anther try. Rik will be chatting with us about open science, the open web, and the role of the hacker/maker ethos in making the world a better place.
Here's his talk, in case you missed it!
-
Open Science and Peer Review
We realized last week that we hadn't talked much about peer review in the open science environment, so on Thursday, I'll be introducing concepts around open peer review, and we will discuss how this interacts with constraints in the current scientific environment. Here are some readings to get you going:
Should authors be told who their reviewers are?
Write it like you plan to sign it- wherein I test-drive open peer review
Why I prefer anonymous reviews, by Terry McGlynn, who you may know from departmental seminars such as EEBB.
Everything changes, and everything stays the same. On post-publication peer review
Exercises
- Preparing a manuscript for submission and review
From last week: Revisit github issue list to ensure all tasks that need completion prior to submission are represented. Use the ‘instructions for authors’ document provided by your journal of choice to help guide this. And if you're ready, submit the manuscript! If you're not, let's start tinking about a schedule for completion, and how I can facilitate this process.
Discussion
Student choice
Today, we're going to cap everything off with a discussion about peer review!
Navigate
Special Guest
You may recall Rik Smith-Unna was to be our special guest back in week 9, but technical difficulties prevailed. Let's give this anther try. Rik will be chatting with us about open science, the open web, and the role of the hacker/maker ethos in making the world a better place.
Here's his talk, in case you missed it!
Open Science and Peer Review
We realized last week that we hadn't talked much about peer review in the open science environment, so on Thursday, I'll be introducing concepts around open peer review, and we will discuss how this interacts with constraints in the current scientific environment. Here are some readings to get you going:
Should authors be told who their reviewers are?
Write it like you plan to sign it- wherein I test-drive open peer review
Why I prefer anonymous reviews, by Terry McGlynn, who you may know from departmental seminars such as EEBB.
Everything changes, and everything stays the same. On post-publication peer review
From last week: Revisit github issue list to ensure all tasks that need completion prior to submission are represented. Use the ‘instructions for authors’ document provided by your journal of choice to help guide this. And if you're ready, submit the manuscript! If you're not, let's start tinking about a schedule for completion, and how I can facilitate this process.
Student choice
Today, we're going to cap everything off with a discussion about peer review!