@petersuber@academicchatter It's a bit strange that most of the Nature commentary goes out of its way to quote other Chinese scientists who claim things are not that bad, actually.
I've gotten to that delirious, sleep-deprived point of the submission process where looking up a list of species names has me thinking that "Gorilla gorilla gorilla" is something I need to share with other humans.
Seven a.m. and I cannot sleep. Very happy to say that my doctoral defense yesterday went as well as it could.
So, as my co-supervisor put it, I'm now "on the academic market" :D
I think the best part of this (except for my wonderful colleagues and friends, who celebrated me yesterday) is that I may now write about whatever I feel like (after finishing the projects I'm already involved in …)! #PhDlife @academicchatter
SPPS has issued an "expression of concern" about an article from 2015 because first author had two articles retracted and the PhD degree revoked bc of data fabrication. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/19485506241261712 As I see it, there is no direct evidence yet for data fabrication for the article under scrutiny.
Honest question: Is it justified to post an expression of concern? I see the that the odds of data fabrication are increasing for every other article by the author that is retracted. 1/ @academicchatter
I think it makes sense to alert readers to the heightened probability of fraud, so this „expression of concern“ (not a verdict yet) makes sense to me. Maybe they just should keep it as a warning sign. But the process seems to require a decision that either leads to a correction/retraction or a removal of the expression of concern.
This episode’s guest is Dr Anne Pasek, Canada Research Chair in Media, Culture, and Environment, and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Cultural Studies and the School of the Environment at Trent University. Dr Pasek is co-founder of the Low Carbon Research Methods Group, and she talks to Ariel all about what Low Carbon Research is (and can look like!), the “carbon footprint” of academic research, new innovative ways for research to respond to the climate crisis, the importance of zines, and even hosting her own solar server in her backyard!
Closed out the paperwork for the Spring term yesterday and, with my first post-semester deadlines approaching, I'm realizing that I seriously under-budgeted the amount of time I would need to stare into near space.
Interviewing PhD candidates for the first time and the role reversal feels... weird! All the candidates bring something different to the table and it's such a tough call to decide who makes the cut.
It's an exciting task, isn't it? Remember that you're hiring the best fit, a person who will grow and help others grow, not necessarily the best scientist/potential scientist on paper.
10 more days to apply! Postdoc position: Working on fair AI and interested to combine normative and empirical research? Come work with me other Leiden colleagues on fair educational assessment in the age of AI.
@TomTheuns
Could you please give me some examples of what kind of AI the successful applicant should have worked with? Is it necessary to have such features in one's doctoral thesis, for example, or more relevant to be genuinely interested and have some knowledge, and a background in such areas as #DigitalHumanities or #corpus_linguistics ? Thank you!
so… humanities commons is changing its name to “knowledge commons”
i dislike this. it was a one of a kind platform that originated in and foregrounded humanities. now it’s dumping it and becoming a generic preprint thing and dumping its niche. a criminally underserved niche
i don’t know if i wanna use it anymore. when i was quite excited that i would soon be able to upload my thesis and planned papers on it @academicchatter
@academicchatter i mean you might think this is a bit of an overreaction on my part but frankly the “humanities” in the name was almost the main attraction for me. it was like the one place humanities wasn’t an afterthought. it is a big deal imo 🤷♂️
Have any good investigative journalists done pieces on how the slant of donors, the power of large universities "strategic communications" departments, and the evisceration of newsrooms have affected how the public gets access to reliable scientific research and information in the public interest? #Science#Newstodon#Journalism@academicchatter
@ttpphd@academicchatter ah, interesting. my first thought is that the system would become more objective, since you'd be eliminating a potential source of bias (who you happen to know, and who happens to be a big name, and who is prepared to write impressive things about you). but maybe this would only shift the landscape and effectively put more of the evaluation burden on journal reviewers and editors, who may have their own biases...
A "cool paper" is a succinct and provocative publication that presents an innovative idea in a clever and thought-provoking manner, often challenging conventional wisdom and inspiring further exploration.
Tell us about cool papers you like and that we should check out!
Man, I talk about this paper from 10 years ago all the time. This is maybe the best paper I've ever read. "Technical tour de force" gets thrown around a lot, but figure 3 alone could be its own major paper, and it's just the creation of a genetic tool to address a molecular hypothesis in vivo. Then throw in "hints at info waiting to be mined from huge published datasets" and "hints at important regulatory mechanism."