The authors of the following preprint ‘Open Science Saves Lives’ will hold a ‘Ask me anything’ #AMA session on Reddit next week – 08:00 am Eastern Time (GMT-4:00) on the 11th November.
Open pad for asking questions on the topic of extending review to news media to help use of science in news.
The paper raises the question that preprints are misused by the news media. In response to this question this document is to collect questions around the idea of extending open peer review to the use of science in news media in general.
Open peer review systems like Prereview and Plaudit have brought smart, nimble, federates review to science. Their inspiration helps us ask the question – could a similar review systems be build for the use of science in news media journalism.
Such a system could be applied to social media as well and allow reviewers to be ranked as reliable, etc. Thank you to Victor Venema of https://fediscience.org for coming up with the idea in the GenR comments. Victor contributes to a service like this Climate Feedback.
Preprint: ‘Open Science Saves Lives: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic’
‘Open Science Saves Lives: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic’ #AMA Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/ Time and date: 08:00 am Eastern Time (GMT-4:00) on the 11th November. Exact link to be provided nearer the time.
Preprint v2: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.13.249847v2 | It has been co-signed by 371 scientists.
I am also working on a peer review system. One that reviews both preprints and articles because its aim is to break the power of the publishers. That means that we need an assessment system for the quality of scientific works that can replace the proxy estimates of where a study is published. So all works need to be reviewed.
It was not on purpose, but in the end the open post-publication assessment system looks a lot like the review system of Climate Feedback for news articles. I guess being active in Climate Feedback gave some inspiration. For details see the homepage:
What would be additional in the system I propose for reviewing press articles is to also accept reviews from people who do not have proven expertise and a statistical system to estimate from their reviews how good press articles are. That system could be trained using data from reviews by experts. Will try to write up my thoughts on this on my blog.
Yep great to open up to the world and people outside of academia and use measures of quality and trust to rate their reliability. Now to read your posting and my first step would be to synthesise the points into the #AMA questions and at the same time reach out innovative open peer review systems via ASAPbio for example, Prereview, Plaudit, etc
I managed to write up my thoughts on such a system in time.
Science Feedback on Steroids https://variable-variability.blogspot.com/2020/11/science-feedback-on-steroids.html