Reposted by Jerome
We've got ISSUES. Literally.
We scraped >100k special issues & over 1 million articles to bring you a PISS-poor paper. We quantify just how many excess papers are published by guest editors abusing special issues to boost their CVs. How bad is it & what can we do?
arxiv.org/abs/2601.07563
A 🧵 1/n
We scraped >100k special issues & over 1 million articles to bring you a PISS-poor paper. We quantify just how many excess papers are published by guest editors abusing special issues to boost their CVs. How bad is it & what can we do?
arxiv.org/abs/2601.07563
A 🧵 1/n
January 13, 2026 at 8:27 AM
We've got ISSUES. Literally.
We scraped >100k special issues & over 1 million articles to bring you a PISS-poor paper. We quantify just how many excess papers are published by guest editors abusing special issues to boost their CVs. How bad is it & what can we do?
arxiv.org/abs/2601.07563
A 🧵 1/n
We scraped >100k special issues & over 1 million articles to bring you a PISS-poor paper. We quantify just how many excess papers are published by guest editors abusing special issues to boost their CVs. How bad is it & what can we do?
arxiv.org/abs/2601.07563
A 🧵 1/n
Reposted by Jerome
Closing out my year with a journal editor shocker 🧵
Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...
Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...
December 19, 2025 at 5:20 PM
Closing out my year with a journal editor shocker 🧵
Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...
Checking new manuscripts today I reviewed a paper attributing 2 papers to me I did not write. A daft thing for an author to do of course. But intrigued I web searched up one of the titles and that's when it got real weird...
Reposted by Jerome
If you're a journalist who reports on "economic impact studies," call up your local university's economics department and ask which course you should audit to learn how IMPLAN works. You'll find that no such course exists, because that's not how economists study economic effects.
Ugh, please don't publish assertions about the supposed "economic impact" of the new stadium. I've seen the "study", it is GARBAGE. Newspapers shouldn't be repeating propaganda as news. www.kansascity.com/news/local/w...
December 23, 2025 at 3:16 PM
If you're a journalist who reports on "economic impact studies," call up your local university's economics department and ask which course you should audit to learn how IMPLAN works. You'll find that no such course exists, because that's not how economists study economic effects.
How much does it owe to mdpi and other "pay per publish" companies... Quite much I would say
Recently did around 30 requests to ppl who'd published very similar papers to the one I needed reviews for. 3 declines, 25 no response. Please at least decline guys it slows stuff down so much otherwise.
I'm still relatively new to this journal associate editor business, but it already sucks… I've had a paper on my desk for more than a month now:
Reviewers invited: 12
Of those…
Declined: 5
No response: 7
Reviewers invited: 12
Of those…
Declined: 5
No response: 7
November 24, 2025 at 10:45 AM
How much does it owe to mdpi and other "pay per publish" companies... Quite much I would say
Reposted by Jerome
Let’s be honest - academia doesn’t reward knowledge, it rewards numbers.
We chase citations, not curiosity. Impact Factors, not impact.
We tell our students that research is about discovery, yet our promotions, grants, and prestige depend on how many times we’ve been counted.
🧵
We chase citations, not curiosity. Impact Factors, not impact.
We tell our students that research is about discovery, yet our promotions, grants, and prestige depend on how many times we’ve been counted.
🧵
November 9, 2025 at 7:57 AM
Let’s be honest - academia doesn’t reward knowledge, it rewards numbers.
We chase citations, not curiosity. Impact Factors, not impact.
We tell our students that research is about discovery, yet our promotions, grants, and prestige depend on how many times we’ve been counted.
🧵
We chase citations, not curiosity. Impact Factors, not impact.
We tell our students that research is about discovery, yet our promotions, grants, and prestige depend on how many times we’ve been counted.
🧵
Reposted by Jerome
The truth revealed about Tomorrowland
July 20, 2025 at 8:35 PM
The truth revealed about Tomorrowland
Reposted by Jerome
From The Economist this week. Spending on tertiary education per full time student and average annual tuition fees charged to domestic students by public institutions. In the case of Britain, there's a pattern that reminds me of something I read about the US 25 years ago./
July 20, 2025 at 7:41 AM
From The Economist this week. Spending on tertiary education per full time student and average annual tuition fees charged to domestic students by public institutions. In the case of Britain, there's a pattern that reminds me of something I read about the US 25 years ago./
Reposted by Jerome
A Borges story about a guy who gets AI to summarize all the world’s information for him, and then summarize the summary, until the AI has the whole world summarized into a single word. He sits alone at his desk, staring at the word, repeating it endlessly, certain he is experiencing everything
July 14, 2025 at 3:02 PM
A Borges story about a guy who gets AI to summarize all the world’s information for him, and then summarize the summary, until the AI has the whole world summarized into a single word. He sits alone at his desk, staring at the word, repeating it endlessly, certain he is experiencing everything
Reposted by Jerome
Unbelievable. Trump basically just stole the FIFA Club World Cup trophy.
Imagine FIFA being in the room with anyone and being the less corrupt party.
Imagine FIFA being in the room with anyone and being the less corrupt party.
July 14, 2025 at 11:10 PM
Unbelievable. Trump basically just stole the FIFA Club World Cup trophy.
Imagine FIFA being in the room with anyone and being the less corrupt party.
Imagine FIFA being in the room with anyone and being the less corrupt party.
Reposted by Jerome
Reposted by Jerome
Peer review meltdown in one diagram.
Greater emphasis on glamour journals leads people to try their luck with mediocre papers. This drains the review pool (they often have to be re-reviewed elsewhere). That drops the accuracy of peer review, creating more incentive to submit mediocre papers…
Greater emphasis on glamour journals leads people to try their luck with mediocre papers. This drains the review pool (they often have to be re-reviewed elsewhere). That drops the accuracy of peer review, creating more incentive to submit mediocre papers…
7. We show that this setup leads to a pernicious positive feedback loop. When submissions increase, more peer reviewers are required. Either current reviewers have to spread their effort thinner, or less qualified reviewers must be recruited. Either way, review accuracy drops.
![Flow diagram. At the center is the key cycle: Authors reduce self-screening --> Reviewer pool becomes depleted --> Accuracy of review declines --> [back to] Authors reduce self-screening.
Outside arrows lead to this central cycle.
Greater emphasis on elite journals --> authors reduce self-screening
More journals create more opportunities for fresh review --> reviewer pool becomes depleted
Common pool dilemma reduces desk rejection rates --> reviewer pool becomes depleted.
There is an additional cycle:
Accuracy of review declines --> Authors learn less from reviews --> Authors reduce self-screening](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:tbqqvyv6pjjww44glrmycaxl/bafkreieslgd5btmytfr2vrqg2v2kqyv3bnwjcommpcxurp2ju4yjdbm454@jpeg)
July 16, 2025 at 6:11 PM
Peer review meltdown in one diagram.
Greater emphasis on glamour journals leads people to try their luck with mediocre papers. This drains the review pool (they often have to be re-reviewed elsewhere). That drops the accuracy of peer review, creating more incentive to submit mediocre papers…
Greater emphasis on glamour journals leads people to try their luck with mediocre papers. This drains the review pool (they often have to be re-reviewed elsewhere). That drops the accuracy of peer review, creating more incentive to submit mediocre papers…
Reposted by Jerome
The solution to climate change is just to chop it up into 34 wedges, and pretend they are all to small to matter.
EPA acknowledges that US power plants are currently responsible for about 3% of all global greenhouse gas emissions. Isn't that "significant"?
You might think so – I sure do! – but here comes the EPA's torturing of logic... (3/8)
You might think so – I sure do! – but here comes the EPA's torturing of logic... (3/8)
June 11, 2025 at 7:39 PM
The solution to climate change is just to chop it up into 34 wedges, and pretend they are all to small to matter.
Reposted by Jerome
Hive mind. Not long ago, someone on social media argued that the "social leasing" scheme for electric cars in France implied a marginal tax rate > 100% for people just below the eligibility threshold. I can't find that post using search. Any idea? RT = 🙏
June 10, 2025 at 2:59 PM
Hive mind. Not long ago, someone on social media argued that the "social leasing" scheme for electric cars in France implied a marginal tax rate > 100% for people just below the eligibility threshold. I can't find that post using search. Any idea? RT = 🙏
Reposted by Jerome
the modern information environment
May 29, 2025 at 3:16 PM
the modern information environment
Reposted by Jerome
You receive a call on your phone.
The caller says they're from your bank and they're calling about a suspected fraudulent payment.
"Oh yeah," you think. Obvious scam, right?
The caller says "I'll send you an in-app notification to prove I'm calling from your bank."
🧵 1/4
The caller says they're from your bank and they're calling about a suspected fraudulent payment.
"Oh yeah," you think. Obvious scam, right?
The caller says "I'll send you an in-app notification to prove I'm calling from your bank."
🧵 1/4
May 3, 2025 at 8:32 AM
You receive a call on your phone.
The caller says they're from your bank and they're calling about a suspected fraudulent payment.
"Oh yeah," you think. Obvious scam, right?
The caller says "I'll send you an in-app notification to prove I'm calling from your bank."
🧵 1/4
The caller says they're from your bank and they're calling about a suspected fraudulent payment.
"Oh yeah," you think. Obvious scam, right?
The caller says "I'll send you an in-app notification to prove I'm calling from your bank."
🧵 1/4
Reposted by Jerome
Pro life
Two headlines in the New York Times today.
April 22, 2025 at 7:55 PM
Pro life
Reposted by Jerome
Given the discussion today. #EthicalPublishing is possible.
Our ethos for many years now:
1. All papers preprinted along with data.
2. No commercial publishers.
3. Only publish in scientific society journals and with reputable non-profit publishers.
4. Collaborators do what they want.
Our ethos for many years now:
1. All papers preprinted along with data.
2. No commercial publishers.
3. Only publish in scientific society journals and with reputable non-profit publishers.
4. Collaborators do what they want.
Society journals vs. #NatureRipoffs @manavellalab @ASPB @NaturePlants
February 24, 2025 at 6:45 PM
Given the discussion today. #EthicalPublishing is possible.
Our ethos for many years now:
1. All papers preprinted along with data.
2. No commercial publishers.
3. Only publish in scientific society journals and with reputable non-profit publishers.
4. Collaborators do what they want.
Our ethos for many years now:
1. All papers preprinted along with data.
2. No commercial publishers.
3. Only publish in scientific society journals and with reputable non-profit publishers.
4. Collaborators do what they want.
Reposted by Jerome
Dorothy summaries the issues with Frontiers/MDPI well but for those who still aren't convinced here are a few basic things worth considering 1/
December 23, 2024 at 5:59 PM
Dorothy summaries the issues with Frontiers/MDPI well but for those who still aren't convinced here are a few basic things worth considering 1/
Reposted by Jerome
Traditional publishers exploit free academic labour to extract rents. Elsevier has 37% profit; still chokes journals for an extra penny.
For-profit OA publishers do the same, flooding in the process the literature with crap papers.
Two enemies, same fight.
Time to take back control of publishing.
For-profit OA publishers do the same, flooding in the process the literature with crap papers.
Two enemies, same fight.
Time to take back control of publishing.
Resignation of the Journal of Human Evolution Editorial Board: We are saddened to announce the resignations of The Joint Editors-in-Chief, all Emeritus Editors retired or active in the field, and all but one Associate Editor. Press release below.
December 27, 2024 at 9:34 AM
Traditional publishers exploit free academic labour to extract rents. Elsevier has 37% profit; still chokes journals for an extra penny.
For-profit OA publishers do the same, flooding in the process the literature with crap papers.
Two enemies, same fight.
Time to take back control of publishing.
For-profit OA publishers do the same, flooding in the process the literature with crap papers.
Two enemies, same fight.
Time to take back control of publishing.
remarquable sur MDPI deevybee.blogspot.com/2024/12/finl...
Finland vs. Germany: the case of MDPI
It's been an odd week for the academic publisher MDPI. On 16th December, Finland's Publication Forum (known as JUFO) announced that from J...
deevybee.blogspot.com
December 25, 2024 at 5:11 PM
remarquable sur MDPI deevybee.blogspot.com/2024/12/finl...
Dire que l'on a besoin de rester maire pour etre en contact avec les français, c'est dire que l'on est pas en contact avec les français.
www.lemonde.fr/politique/ar...
www.lemonde.fr/politique/ar...
François Bayrou reste maire de Pau et propose de revenir sur le non-cumul des mandats
Le nouveau premier ministre, maire de cette ville depuis 2014, a considéré que l’incompatibilité des fonctions de parlementaire et d’exécutif local avait été « une erreur ». Tous n’en sont pas convain...
www.lemonde.fr
December 17, 2024 at 1:55 PM
Dire que l'on a besoin de rester maire pour etre en contact avec les français, c'est dire que l'on est pas en contact avec les français.
www.lemonde.fr/politique/ar...
www.lemonde.fr/politique/ar...
Reposted by Jerome
Every time you write "there is no effect/difference (p>0.05)", when you mean "we found no evidence for an effect/difference (p>0.05)" a baby kitten dies
November 28, 2024 at 11:15 AM
Every time you write "there is no effect/difference (p>0.05)", when you mean "we found no evidence for an effect/difference (p>0.05)" a baby kitten dies
Reposted by Jerome
Now I've come across several instances of people writing, essentially:
'Let me provide a very rough estimate. Don't take this number literally, because it has several flaws.'
And then their number becomes cited as the canonical figure on the topic.
'Let me provide a very rough estimate. Don't take this number literally, because it has several flaws.'
And then their number becomes cited as the canonical figure on the topic.
November 26, 2024 at 12:41 AM
Now I've come across several instances of people writing, essentially:
'Let me provide a very rough estimate. Don't take this number literally, because it has several flaws.'
And then their number becomes cited as the canonical figure on the topic.
'Let me provide a very rough estimate. Don't take this number literally, because it has several flaws.'
And then their number becomes cited as the canonical figure on the topic.