Tap a claim on the ring to put it at the centre.
← Published effect sizes shrink as more studies are done, and that…
8 connected korrents · 5 moments on record from 15 Aug 2019 to 29 Aug 2023.
Everything filed under peer review
peer review Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Same subject Read this korrent: Published effect sizes shrink as more studies are done, and that decline is what the replication crisis is made of. Published effect sizes shrink as more studies are done, and that decline is what the replication crisis is made of. Last stated 4 years ago
11 Oct 2022
SR
Stuart Ritchie — holds since 2022-10-11 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Fraudulent papers pass peer review routinely, which is direct evidence that peer review does not do the job it is supposed to do. — tap to centre the map on it Fraudulent papers pass peer review routinely, which is direct evidence that peer review does not do the job it is supposed to do. Last stated 4 years ago
13 Dec 2022
AM
Adam Mastroianni — holds since 2022-12-13 — tap for who they are
Same subject: History has a reproducibility problem worse than science’s replication crisis, because hardly anyone ever goes back to the sources to check what a historian claimed they say. — tap to centre the map on it History has a reproducibility problem worse than science’s replication crisis, because hardly anyone ever goes back to the sources to check what a historian claimed they say. Last stated 3 years ago
29 Aug 2023
AH
Anton Howes — holds since 2023-08-29 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Needing a reviewer's approval before an idea counts for anything makes scientists worse at thinking, and costs the field its most unusual ideas. — tap to centre the map on it Needing a reviewer's approval before an idea counts for anything makes scientists worse at thinking, and costs the field its most unusual ideas. Last stated 4 years ago
13 Dec 2022
AM
Adam Mastroianni — holds since 2022-12-13 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Peer review is one of the things genuinely wrong with academia, not a safeguard that mostly works. — tap to centre the map on it Peer review is one of the things genuinely wrong with academia, not a safeguard that mostly works. Last stated 4 years ago
13 Dec 2022
AG
Alexey Guzey — holds since 2019-08-15 — tap for who they are
AM
Adam Mastroianni — holds since 2022-12-13 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Pre-grant peer review predicts which research will have impact substantially better than chance does. — tap to centre the map on it Pre-grant peer review predicts which research will have impact substantially better than chance does. Last stated 6 years ago
20 Jan 2021
JR
José Luis Ricón — holds since 2021-01-20 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Scientists say they take peer review seriously, but what they actually do shows they do not think it matters. — tap to centre the map on it Scientists say they take peer review seriously, but what they actually do shows they do not think it matters. Last stated 4 years ago
13 Dec 2022
AM
Adam Mastroianni — holds since 2022-12-13 — tap for who they are
Same subject: Sixty years of peer review produced no evidence that it made science better, and the literature it produced is in a bad state. — tap to centre the map on it Sixty years of peer review produced no evidence that it made science better, and the literature it produced is in a bad state. Last stated 4 years ago
13 Dec 2022
AM
Adam Mastroianni — holds since 2022-12-13 — tap for who they are
Same subject: The cost of grant peer review is dominated by the time researchers spend writing applications, not by the reviewing itself. — tap to centre the map on it The cost of grant peer review is dominated by the time researchers spend writing applications, not by the reviewing itself. Last stated 6 years ago
20 Jan 2021
JR
José Luis Ricón — holds since 2021-01-20 — tap for who they are