@metaror.bsky.social
MetaROR is a community initiative led jointly by RoRI and AIMOS. It provides a platform that leverages the publish–review-curate model to improve the dissemination and evaluation of metaresearch.
That's great news, Serhii! Congratulations on the JDIS acceptance 👏
21.11.2025 16:41 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
🤝 We have also launched partnerships with 9 journals, who are formally committed to base its publication decisions fully or partially on review reports published by MetaROR.
We'd like to thank these journals for their trust and look forward to continued collaboration together!
[2/3]
🙏 Of course, we're grateful to all contributing editors, authors & reviewers.
Special thanks to @aschniedermann.bsky.social, @serhiinazarovets.bsky.social, @csmarcum.sciences.social.ap.brid.gy, @hldejonge.bsky.social & @jeroenson.bsky.social whose valuable feedback we mentioned in the piece.
[3/3]
🎈 Time flies! Exactly one year ago today @rorinstitute.bsky.social and @aimosinc.bsky.social launched MetaROR, a platform to publish metaresearch through the publish-review-curate approach.
Over the course of the year, we published 28 articles reviewed by 59 different reviewers.
[1/3]
Discussion about next steps for MetaROR @metaror.bsky.social A partnership between @aimosinc.bsky.social and @rorinstitute.bsky.social
Led by @alexh.bsky.social and @aidybarnett.bsky.social
#AIMOS2025
More people need to know about MetaROR @metaror.bsky.social! If you are doing meta-research, then you get that the for-profit publishing system is a headache – you can help sideline journals by having your preprints handled by the MetaROR team for the peer review process. #AIMOS2025
20.11.2025 10:13 — 👍 14 🔁 6 💬 0 📌 0🙏 A big thank you to our author (Bence Orkeny), reviewers (Olavo Amaral, Sven Ulpts) and editors (@jabyrnesci.bsky.social, Kathryn Zeiler)
19.11.2025 10:33 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Our newest study "reviews and categorises 15 publications that debate the epistemic function of replications."
Reviewers found the question important, yet had some concerns about the small number of pubs selected and how they were chosen.
👇 Read the editorial assessment, reviews and full text now
👏 We'd like to thank our authors (Alex Hulkes, Cillian Brophy and Ben Steyn), reviewers (Serge Horbach, @thofel.bsky.social) and editor (@ludowaltman.bsky.social) for their contributions
14.11.2025 10:28 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Our latest article uses simulations to "explore ways in which decision reliability, bias, extent of decision randomisation and other factors interact".
Reviewers consider it timely and "methodologically sound" while challenging some of the assumptions and offering suggestions.
👇 Read it here
Revised preprint: "Establishing trust in automated reasoning"
osf.io/preprints/me...
Based on two very helpful reviews from @metaror.bsky.social:
metaror.org/kotahi/artic...
More references, better discussion of unfamiliar concepts (e.g. conviviality), and more.
🧪 #metasci #compsci
👏 We are grateful to all of our 25 authors (including corresponding author @alexrushforth.bsky.social), our reviewers (@elizabethgadd.bsky.social, @karenstroobants.bsky.social & Neil Jacobs) and our editors (Kathryn Zeiler, @alexh.bsky.social)
04.11.2025 15:44 — 👍 0 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
How are national systems for assessing publicly funded research evolving? That's the question our latest article poses.
Reviewers consider the work "valuable and timely", noting its relevance to reform initiatives like @coarassessment.bsky.social
👇 Read the assessment, reviews & full article here
👏 A big thank you to our authors (Achal Agrawal, Moumita Koley), reviewers (@neurosarda.bsky.social, @eggletonkim.bsky.social) and editor (@ludowaltman.bsky.social)
24.10.2025 10:25 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Between open reviews and cases of abusing anonymity, the authors of our latest article argue for "pseudo-anonymous" (i.e., traceable) reviews.
The reviewers support the general idea while also offering amendments and alternative solutions.
👇 Read the assessment, reviews & full article now
Just finished my @metaror.bsky.social journey – two rounds of #OpenPeerReview, valuable feedback, a stronger paper, and finally a journal submission. Open review takes time, but it’s worth every week for the transparency and trust it brings. doi.org/10.70744/Met... #OpenScience #Publishing
14.10.2025 08:31 — 👍 4 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0I just published my first paper on MetaROR (MetaResearch Open Review). The #PublishReviewCurate model brings reviewing and editorial decision making into the open.
To me, it can become a real game changer in #ScholarlyCommunication. I got great reviews and look forward to revise my manuscript!
👏 Our thanks as always go to our author (aschniedermann.bsky.social), reviewers (David Moher, @mjpages.bsky.social) and editors (@jabyrnesci.bsky.social, Kathryn Zeiler)
09.10.2025 14:10 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
🆕 Our latest study asks how authors incorporate the PRISMA guideline into workflows when conducting reviews.
Both reviewers highlighted the study's importance yet also requested more information and details from the author.
👇 Read the full editorial assessment, reviews and paper on MetaROR
Very glad to see the ANU Journal of Law and Technology has agreed to be @metaror.bsky.social's first partner journal from the field of law: cms.metaror.org/partner-jour...
MetaROR partners accept MetaROR reviews as part of their editorial process, making the publishing ecosystem more efficient.
👏 Congratulations and thanks go out to our authors (@aidybarnett.bsky.social, Nicole White, @tayacollyer.bsky.social), reviewers (Catherine Victoria Bunce, J.L. Hutton) and editors (Kathryn Zeiler, @stephenpinfield.bsky.social) for their contributions
12.09.2025 12:08 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
A qualified statistician's review can improve study designs. But who has access to one? Our new article surveys this among Australian human research ethics committees.
Reviewers liked the article yet were disappointed by the response rate. They suggested minor changes.
👇Read it now on MetaROR
👏 Apart from the author, we would, as always, also like to thank the reviewers (Nico Formanek) and editors (@aidybarnett.bsky.social, @ludowaltman.bsky.social)
10.09.2025 14:18 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
📠 Why should we trust automated reasoning systems? That's the question posed in our latest article by @khinsen.scholar.social.ap.brid.gy.
The two reviewers generally praise the ideas but ask for more detail and share some concerns.
👇 Read the editorial assessment, reviews and full paper at MetaROR
Thank you Hans for sharing your positive experience with @metaror.bsky.social, using your reviews and assessment to publish at our partner journal, Quantitative Science Studies: www.openscience.nl/en/cases/the...
10.09.2025 03:08 — 👍 11 🔁 6 💬 0 📌 0
🔓 It's great to see authors sharing their experiences with publishing on MetaROR (MetaResearch Open Review) — our open review platform for metascience using the publish–review–curate model: www.openscience.nl/en/cases/the...
09.09.2025 11:42 — 👍 4 🔁 3 💬 0 📌 0👏 To our authors (Narmin Rzayeva, @stephenpinfield.bsky.social, @ludowaltman.bsky.social), reviewers, and editors (@jabyrnesci.bsky.social, Kathryn Zeiler): congratulations and thank you for your contributions!
03.09.2025 13:46 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
⌛ How is preprinting adopted over time across disciplines and regions? Our latest article attempts to answer this.
The reviewers praised the comprehensive analysis & clear presentation, while requesting more background information & addressing data availability issues.
👇 Read it now on MetaROR
MetaROR will be present at the @stienid2025.bsky.social conference this week!
We are excited for all the presentations, discussions and inspiration to come and we would be more than happy to greet you at our stand 👋
www.stienid2025.org
This great new initiative highlights lots of interesting research and initiatives, including (on p.40) a primer on what MetaROR is doing, by @andre-brasil.bsky.social
👏 Congratulations to everyone involved for producing such a great magazine!
