Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
LightNews LightNews
banner
jpinasanchez.bsky.social
Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
@jpinasanchez.bsky.social
1.8K followers 1.3K following 440 posts
Professor of Quantitative Criminology and co-director of the Social Research Methods centre at the University of Leeds. Interested in #Data #Bias #Measurement #CriminalJustice #Sentencing #Disparities.
jmpinasanchez.github.io/
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
xkcd.com
Car Size

xkcd.com/3167/
4-panel vertical comic. (1) 100 Years Ago [two people standing next to bicycle with small car nearby] PERSON 1: It’s too dangerous riding a bike with these cars around. I should get a car, too. (2) 50 Years Ago [two people between smaller car and bigger car] PERSON 2 with short hair: Small cars are less safe in collisions with larger vehicles, so I should get a bigger one. (3) Today [two people between big car and even bigger car] PERSON 1: Everyone has huge SUVs now. If I don’t get the biggest one, I’m putting my family at risk. (4) Soon [two people next to large armored car with spiked clubs attached] PERSON 2: If I don’t install more whirling spike clubs, I’ll be destroyed by all the other drivers who...
November 14, 2025 at 9:15 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
cjayanetti.bsky.social
Starmer isn't Britain's worst ever prime minister, but he is Labour's worst ever prime minister and it's not even close
November 14, 2025 at 8:33 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
stefhaustein.scholcommlab.ca
We’re asking research funders & universities to step up because together, they have the leverage - and frankly, the responsibility - to stop the drain and redirect billions currently flowing to commercial publishers 💸 back into community-owned systems that serve science, not profit.
9/n
November 13, 2025 at 8:17 PM
jpinasanchez.bsky.social
Mojca Plesnicar introducing her ERC project on #sentencing architecture.
Ps: check out the castle in the background.
November 12, 2025 at 2:15 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
pwgtennant.bsky.social
How do we incentivise people to publish fewer papers?

We need to live in a world where saying 'I have published over 500 papers' is widely understood as a red flag, not as something to brag about.
November 12, 2025 at 10:08 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
hansonmark.bsky.social
More fundamentally, every active scientist has been brought up in a system where The Drain was already normalized.

This system hasn't always existed. For-profit publishers are a recent invention. Their value proposition has always been awful, and now they are actively eroding trust in science.

5/n
2. Stopping the drain Back in the 1950s, when for-profit journal publishing was just getting going, British scientific leaders predicted that ‘the moment commercial gain began to dominate this field, the welfare of the scientific community would suffer’ (1). They were right – and it is past time that we acted. The first step we must take is to recognize the seriousness of the problems that scientific publishing’s engagement with for-profit publishing have become.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
hansonmark.bsky.social
Scientists operate on principles of good faith. But this is just ridiculous. If you, dear reader, take nothing else away from The Drain paper, it is that publishers cannot be invited to the table any longer.

They can participate and carve a space, but they can't be part of shaping policy.

3/n
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
pwgtennant.bsky.social
Epic picture of @clanfear.bsky.social delivering a thunderous introduction to the potential outcomes framework in Leeds last week! Passion emanating from every fibre of his being.

This is what the causal inference movement needs. A joy to behold.
November 11, 2025 at 10:16 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
snellarthur.bsky.social
If a self-identifying “left of centre” government with a parliamentary majority of more than a hundred seats won’t defend a vital public service institution you really have to ask why it’s in government at all.
lewisgoodall.com Lewis Goodall @lewisgoodall.com · 4d
The reaction to the Panorama edit has been nothing short of hysterical. Yes the BBC has some impartiality problems. But its biggest isn't the one you think.

New piece from me.

open.substack.com/pub/goodalla...
The truth about impartiality at the BBC
And the hysteria of the current "crisis"
open.substack.com
November 11, 2025 at 9:08 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
foxnic.bsky.social
“ambitious plan to digitalize the courts […]
an IT system, introduced as part of a £1bn project, has been plagued with technical faults - causing crucial information to go missing, be overwritten, or appear lost
[…]
was known about for years before action was taken”

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m...
BBC Radio 4 - File on 4 Investigates, The IT bug that's caused chaos in the courts
An IT bug caused evidence to go missing or appear lost in some court cases.
www.bbc.co.uk
November 11, 2025 at 6:46 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
pwgtennant.bsky.social
"Brexit has reduced GDP by 6% to 8%"

So actually worse than 'project fear'. Great job everyone.

cc @mrjamesob.bsky.social
davidheniguk.bsky.social David Henig @davidheniguk.bsky.social · 5d
Headline from a serious and long working paper on the economic impact of Brexit. Possible that this has been feeding into OBR and HMT discussions?
November 10, 2025 at 10:40 AM
jpinasanchez.bsky.social
All political parties in #Ilkley (West Yorkshire) support free parking. Even the #Green party is affected by this form of #Braincar rot.
November 9, 2025 at 2:02 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
thenerve.news
Elon Musk’s AI service Grok is so drunkenly, transparently biased that it would be funny – if it weren’t a mortal threat to democracy

This week’s column by Stewart Lee

www.thenerve.news/p/stewart-le...
‘Using Grok is like believing what your farting uncle says at Christmas’: Stewart Lee on X’s AI chatbot
November 9, 2025 at 11:00 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
socialmedialab.ca
"Why American-style polarisation is spreading across the West"

Two words: algorithms and incentives. Mostly incentives. Until we modify or eliminate incentives, all we can do is watch as the fabric of society is pulled apart, strand by strand. www.ft.com/content/5060...
November 7, 2025 at 2:57 PM
jpinasanchez.bsky.social
Keir Starmer and Labour could really learn a lesson from Spain about the implications of not being a dick to immigrants.
johnspringford.bsky.social John Springford @johnspringford.bsky.social · 9d
Spain in a sweet spot: tourism boom, growing high value services, decent manufacturing base, relatively low energy costs, high immigration.
www.reuters.com/default/spai...
November 6, 2025 at 11:53 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
rjsilverwood.bsky.social
We are organising a @royalstatsoc.bsky.social Social Statistics Section online event:

Handling survey mode effects

Wednesday 12 November 2025, 10.00AM - 12.10PM

Full info and booking: rss.org.uk/training-eve...
RSS Event: Handling survey mode effects
rss.org.uk
October 9, 2025 at 3:03 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
matti.vuorre.com
Abstract Science relies on integrity and trustworthiness. But scientists under career pressure are lured to purchase fake publications from ‘paper mills’ that use AI-generated data, text and image fabrication. The number of low-quality or fraudulent publications is rising to hundreds of thousands per year, which—if unchecked—will damage the scientific and economic progress of our societies. The result is editor and reviewer fatigue, irreproducible experiments, misguided experiments, disinformation and escalating costs that devour funding from taxpayers intended for research. It is high time to reevaluate current publishing models and outline a global plan to stop this unhealthy development. A conference was therefore organized by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences to draft an action plan with specific recommendations, as follows. (i) Academia should resume control of publishing using non-profit publishing models (e.g. diamond open-access). (ii) Adjust incentive systems to merit quality, not quantity, in a reputation economy where the gaming of publication numbers and citation metrics distorts the perception of academic excellence. (iii) Implement mechanisms to prevent and detect fake publications and fraud which are independent of publishers. (iv) Draft and implement legislations, regulations and policies to increase publishing quality and integrity. This is a call to action for universities, academies, science organizations and funders to unite and join this effort.
November 6, 2025 at 8:02 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
jjmedina.bsky.social
Ok,a very informal survey. I need suggestions as to the best UG programs in criminology, criminal justice, crime science internationally. Context: we need to persuade my Uni of what the contents have to be for our reformed program & need to arm myself with arguments and good examples
November 5, 2025 at 5:58 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
cianoconcubhair.bsky.social
The wonderful local newspaper The Dublin InQuirer has just published a number of stories from their own victimisation survey.

www.dublininquirer.com/new-survey-o...
November 5, 2025 at 9:54 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
lswisnom.bsky.social
Academics in Assyria in the 7th c BC complain that admin is preventing them from doing research and teaching
November 3, 2025 at 10:04 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
georgiatomova.bsky.social
Interested in learning about handling survey mode effects?

Still not too late to register for this online event next week 👇
rjsilverwood.bsky.social Richard Silverwood @rjsilverwood.bsky.social · Oct 9
We are organising a @royalstatsoc.bsky.social Social Statistics Section online event:

Handling survey mode effects

Wednesday 12 November 2025, 10.00AM - 12.10PM

Full info and booking: rss.org.uk/training-eve...
RSS Event: Handling survey mode effects
rss.org.uk
November 3, 2025 at 10:36 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
carnage4life.bsky.social
arXiv will no longer accept review articles and position papers unless they have been accepted at a journal or a conference and complete successful peer review.

This is due to being overwhelmed by a hundreds of AI generated papers a month.

Yet another open submission process killed by LLMs.
Attention Authors: Updated Practice for Review Articles and Position Papers in arXiv CS Category – arXiv blog
blog.arxiv.org
November 1, 2025 at 5:28 PM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
claesdevreese.bsky.social
It’s not easy to break free from deep dependencies. But it can be done. ICC to drop MS for German alternative ⬇️

www.euractiv.com/news/interna...
International Criminal Court to ditch Microsoft Office for European open source alternative | Euractiv
The court will move its internal work environment to Open Desk, a German-developed open source software
www.euractiv.com
October 31, 2025 at 7:33 AM
Reposted by Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺
msoltes.bsky.social
Thanks, @jpinasanchez.bsky.social !

Hoping this brings together everyone who ever thought, “This looks fishy — we should really test that,” in criminal law.
jpinasanchez.bsky.social Jose Pina-Sánchez 🇪🇺 @jpinasanchez.bsky.social · 16d
To the interest of researchers working on #empirical #criminal #law. There is a new working group hosted by the European Society of Empirical Legal Studies. Led by 2 rising stars in the field, @msoltes.bsky.social & Jakub Drapal. #ESELS members can join here: esels.eu/working-group/
October 29, 2025 at 3:56 PM