An oldie-but-a-goodie. Seems to be a particularly important reminder in a space where we focus intensely on retractions & research misconduct https://t.co/NhHIiEsafm
@hapyresearchers So true! Also so not what we learn or I should say what I learned. Reminds me of an article I read a long time ago: https://t.co/KrH8LOsncb
Thought provoking paper about what we should consider when we do peer review
RT @BaxevanisLab: The abstract: "Good early training of graduate students and postdocs is needed to prevent them turning into future genera…
The abstract: "Good early training of graduate students and postdocs is needed to prevent them turning into future generations of manuscript-savaging reviewers. How can we intercalate typical papers into our training?" https://t.co/7WrtqWg3sW
@OdedRechavi I'd keep this in mind when teaching trainees how to analyze a paper https://t.co/ZxIC9A0rsa
@ACMidwin Some of this is our fault too. But too often it is about perfection rather than recognising what is made more certain by the work and what is left uncertain despite the work, & to be addressed. https://t.co/ZBuF70QQ3c
@vdlorenzo_CNB We also train pit bulls ... https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
RT @JanTrka: Yes, often we do to others what we hate when happening to us... one of the things I hate is when reviewer proposes to do entir…
Yes, often we do to others what we hate when happening to us... one of the things I hate is when reviewer proposes to do entirely different study than we're presenting, or asks for needless laborious experiments.
RT @NTallapragada: @DavidPCook @arjunrajlab Related: https://t.co/ZIZirr3Glj
@arnavm1 @Caroline_Bartma Related: https://t.co/ZIZirr3Glj Hilariously, we read this paper in journal club in my first year of grad school, and everyone proceeded to tear it apart.
We train "pitbulls" to review our manuscripts https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC https://t.co/Uw5Nr0rZBJ
@introspection @PLOSCompBiol @PLOSONE Dear @SANS_news, do you have people in the community studying aggression in peer-reviewers? If you collect data, here just 1 case study, one of our own better social neuroscientists. Making constructive peer reviews is
RT @aemonten: @raulpacheco Partly a consequence of training https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
RT @aemonten: @raulpacheco Partly a consequence of training https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
@raulpacheco Partly a consequence of training https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
@rachelwmartin @OdedRechavi Reminds me of this paper we read in journal club in my 1st year of grad school — which, of course, everyone proceeded to tear apart. How meta. https://t.co/ZIZirr3Glj
RT @aemonten: Such attitudes to review a paper are even taught in grad school. As Virginia Walbot wrote, "are we training pit bulls to rev…
RT @aemonten: Such attitudes to review a paper are even taught in grad school. As Virginia Walbot wrote, "are we training pit bulls to rev…
Such attitudes to review a paper are even taught in grad school. As Virginia Walbot wrote, "are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" See: ➡️https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
And this may go back to how we train students... Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
@WestDiworld Poh, que bacana. Se tiver tempo e se interessar, leia esse também. https://t.co/FBMyJPrqFD Indicação de leitura do @DiogoProvete . Vale muito a pena ler.
@mmejiaramirez Walbot, V. (2009). Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? Journal of Biology, 8(3), 24. https://t.co/lsGvDYkMLp
@MattNeuro I would 1000000x rather be at a journal club in which I learn about a cool new approach or finding than one that tears a paper down. I find it a totally bizarre and toxic idea that this would be the standard. https://t.co/zxRNEn7sIA https://t.co
RT @caseybergman: @Symbionticism This is good if you haven’t found it already https://t.co/jp10UkpVnx
@Symbionticism This is good if you haven’t found it already https://t.co/jp10UkpVnx
RT @cmhmaliani: @Xilef_AB @Amor_Plantonico @JeffOllerton Interesting thoughts on what is happening with reviewers: https://t.co/aaJaXZPvf0
RT @cmhmaliani: @Xilef_AB @Amor_Plantonico @JeffOllerton Interesting thoughts on what is happening with reviewers: https://t.co/aaJaXZPvf0
RT @cmhmaliani: @Xilef_AB @Amor_Plantonico @JeffOllerton Interesting thoughts on what is happening with reviewers: https://t.co/aaJaXZPvf0
@Xilef_AB @Amor_Plantonico @JeffOllerton Interesting thoughts on what is happening with reviewers: https://t.co/aaJaXZPvf0
Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? https://t.co/Ggh8lAmmdd
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
Should we reassess what/how we discuss papers in journal clubs in order to train better manuscript reviewers? https://t.co/DNnTOhiKhF
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @CaitilynAllen: A terrific short perspective, I’ve been teaching it for years! https://t.co/1PiISdU8EB
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
RT @HoityPloidy: Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the s…
Haven’t seen this make the twitter rounds. With all the 3rd reviewer memes, I think this paper is worth sharing at the start of every journal club. https://t.co/QIB4vWr09H
What makes a good #research paper? Experimentally solid, timely, addresses "unanswered issues that are on the minds of those in the field", and targets "specific issues amenable to experimental or theoretical resolution". From: https://t.co/pIsoDDjBSZ
RT @TenderIsTheByte: Interesting stuff!!🤔"The majority of our collective publications, and hence scientific progress, comes from incrementa…
Interesting stuff!!🤔"The majority of our collective publications, and hence scientific progress, comes from incremental insights in which the context is provided by the ongoing struggle to resolve a number of outstanding questions in a field." https://t.co
RT @rellanalvarez: @BraybrookSA @SpicyBotrytis @facette_lab @ThePlantCell @Biokid001 @ASPB good opportunity to re-read Ginny Walbot's paper…
@rellanalvarez reminded me of this article by G Walbot: https://t.co/SrYuAPhb7p
@KA_Tamminen This paper suggests some reviewing practices to adopt and to teach : https://t.co/G2rFAZQls7
Thanks for the read!
Oh!! Well I have to read this one for sure!! https://t.co/dw8wIPFC8w
RT @eblissmoreau: It's time to teach my trainees how to write effective manuscript reviews. Who's got favorite resources for that? I know…
RT @eblissmoreau: It's time to teach my trainees how to write effective manuscript reviews. Who's got favorite resources for that? I know…
It's time to teach my trainees how to write effective manuscript reviews. Who's got favorite resources for that? I know this one 👇🏻but would love other suggestions. https://t.co/BTA4sL1Aq2
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
RT @BCHEPPdepthead: Spent 20 years teaching research skills to new grad students. Rule #1 regarding peer review: The reviewer should make e…
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
I highly recommend this paper. It was instrumental in how I approach reviews. https://t.co/Z809dEz1HH
RT @JoseDinneny: A paper from my colleague Virginia Walbot that is quite pertinent to our conversation regarding training good community no…
Spent 20 years teaching research skills to new grad students. Rule #1 regarding peer review: The reviewer should make every attempt to be an advocate for the work, not an adversary. Reviewers help the author make the most of their work. (Not what I usually
@3DiMMUNE Some have argued that training plays a role in that https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
Here's where that reference is from https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC
RT @NRIN_Integrity: Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? https://t.co/vF1ZxQzbOH #jbiol
RT @latwec: This commentary from Virgina Walbot "Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" https://t.co/Oyx8e3txfE is very rele…
The experiment we are running on mentoring, engaging and training early careers proves to be a success: https://t.co/5w4uR2Sein https://t.co/mV9yFIlVUG
Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? https://t.co/vF1ZxQzbOH #jbiol
RT @latwec: This commentary from Virgina Walbot "Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" https://t.co/Oyx8e3txfE is very rele…
RT @latwec: This commentary from Virgina Walbot "Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" https://t.co/Oyx8e3txfE is very rele…
RT @latwec: This commentary from Virgina Walbot "Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" https://t.co/Oyx8e3txfE is very rele…
This commentary from Virgina Walbot "Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?" https://t.co/Oyx8e3txfE is very relevant to breakout discussion #bioPeerReview
RT @aemonten: As a Commentary once asked, "are we training pitbulls to review our papers?" https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC https://t.co/oaSqyFBgV5
As a Commentary once asked, "are we training pitbulls to review our papers?" https://t.co/ZxIC9zIQAC https://t.co/oaSqyFBgV5
RT @rellanalvarez: @jrossibarra Give them some Walbot's wisdom to read: https://t.co/b01ocsrmzo
RT @rellanalvarez: @jrossibarra Give them some Walbot's wisdom to read: https://t.co/b01ocsrmzo
@j_cerca Fridge magnet? From a Comment and Editorial a while back! https://t.co/IJA5VKLKkD https://t.co/dGkgwhAkD7
A paper worth reading #kindnessinscience folks. Are we training pit bulls...? https://t.co/ZBuF70yGP4
RT @A_J_Millar: Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to a…
RT @A_J_Millar: Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to a…
RT @A_J_Millar: Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to a…
@plantgenomes @PlantEvolution @3rdreviewer and @magnusnordborg, @ucdflowerpower This was detached by Buffer, meant for this thread: https://t.co/kfXJ5waumN
RT @A_J_Millar: Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to a…
Interesting - maybe we should reject theses for PhD with minor errors and typos... https://t.co/1tbm2DIQvS
RT @A_J_Millar: Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to a…
Grateful to reviewers' service to sci (and some publishers). ICYMI Virginia Walbot https://t.co/4gPrw0zqXL on training to avoid .. 1/