Lukas Röseler

Screenshot from Zenodo community page of R2 that includes multiple research itmes such as manuscript layout, flyer, constitution, and journal description.

Setting up a new journal involves a lot of work such as website materials, a constitution, submission guideilens, reviewer guidelines, and manuscript stylesheets. You can find all of the @r2journal.bsky.social materials versionized + citable in our R2 Community on Zenodo: zenodo.org/communities/...

YouTube video by Veritasium You've (Likely) Been Playing The Game of Life Wrong

Lots of useful thoughts for the game of academia in @veritasium.bsky.social video on distribution of rare events. The current way of rewarding citations of people and journals incentivizes quantity over consistency: m.youtube.com/watch?v=HBlu...

Comparing meta-analyses and preregistered multiple-laboratory replication projects - Nature Human Behaviour Kvarven, Strømland and Johannesson compare meta-analyses to multiple-laboratory replication projects and find that meta-analyses overestimate effect sizes by a factor of almost three. Commonly used me...

Preregistered studies are common, and yield more reliable evidence than meta-analyses: www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Survey of open science practices and attitudes in the social sciences - Nature Communications Open science practices are becoming more common in the social sciences, but there is limited data on their popularity and prevalence. Here, using survey data, the authors provide evidence that levels ...

People post more code and preregister more, and have very positive attitudes about it www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Increase in sample sizes: Bakker, M., Lê, T. T., & Marzalek, J. M. (2025). osf.io/preprints/ps...

I made an error that I found thanks to @lukaswallrich.bsky.social. The code and preprint have been corrected/updated. Effects on false positive rates are smaller and only for alternative and correlation method but I think the overall argument still works.

Plus, they are non-profit, so you won't need to ask them to sell their soul...

They can sign up for journals. Rescience C, CODECHECK, Replication Research have forms for people who want to contribute. I think all have open reviews and clear reviewer guidelines so they can put a citable review report on their CV. R2 will also launch a mentorship program next year.

Last Friday we held Munster Replication Games (@uni-muenster.de jointly with #MüCOS and #CDSC). Sixty researchers replicated fifteen papers: well done, everybody! Many thanks to the local organizers as well, @bschlipphak.bsky.social and @aufdroeseler.bsky.social and Katrin Schmietendorf :)

Lots of instiutions are working on tracking their 'information budget' and with www.openapc.net an approxination shouldn't be too difficult

Is there an app or so that automatically calculates how much #APC have been paid for the papers in a reference list (e.g., from an author or from a paper)?

Hello world! Follow this account to receive announcements, invitations for open peer review, and publications from Replication Research.

Now this is a new one: My university's license of SAGE journals allows me to view but not to download the research articles. According to ChatGPT read-access costs 100K€ p.a. If you want to make 100% sure that interested readers can access your article, publish it in a #diamondopenaccess journal.

Preregistrations without Code do not Prevent P-Hacking: You can increase your chances for a significant finding in the absence of real effects even with correlations and t test despite having preregistered your hypothesis (e.g., simply changing arguments in the functions).

doi.org/10.31222/osf...

Preliminary slides: osf.io/2w4zh
Webinar schedule and log-in: www.allianzschwerpunkt-digitalitaet.de/2025/09/25/w...

Commercial publishers are smart: They have constructed a prisoner's dilemma for researchers, institutions, and countries from which they profit. I'll be one of the people talking about resesarch assessment in practice at a German webinar tomorrow - tune in to join the discussion!

Examples that could have been saved by long time archival with DOIs PsychFileDrawer.org: once a way for researchers to empty their filedrawer and now it is lost ReplicationWiki: Offline since >6 months, most of the data lost https://replication.uni-goettingen.de Curate Science database‘s references: many links lead to github, are not working, and values are not reproducible https://web.archive.org/web/20220128104303mp_/https://curatescience.org/app/replications Blog post by Roger Peng structuring disciplines and how they are affected by problems with reproducibility: https://simplystatistics.org/2016/08/24/replication-crisis moved to https://simplystatistics.org/posts/2016-08-24-replication-crisis OSF links moved (eg from https://osf.io/74ke9 to https://osf.io/tbkzh/wiki?wiki=ezt7b) This social media post: you may try to find it in a few weeks and won‘t be able to

If have an academic contribution such as a blog post, teaching materials, a coded website, dataset, etc. Please consider #long-termarchiving and #FAIRdata sharing. eg you can put it all on Zenodo and it will be findable for the next 20 years.

And please let me know if you find any of these things:

PCI Webinar Series - Peer Community In The PCI webinar series is a series of seminars on research practices, publication practices, evaluation, scientific integrity, meta-research, organised by Peer Community In

📣 Save the date for the 13th PCI webinar on December 1st, 2025, at 4 PM CET!! Simine Vazire (University of Melbourne, Australia) will present "Recognizing and responding to a replication crisis: Lessons from Psychology". For more details and registration, visit: buff.ly/wZNoD2v

And you know what? Anybody can join these projects and contribute to open science, become part of a large diverse community, and co-author papers.

A lot is going on at @forrt.bsky.social! #OER, #metascience, #socialjustice, and much more. If you want to get a glimpse of some of the projects, check out this beautiful booklet at forrt.org/booklet created by @irissmal.bsky.social

ReplicationResearch.org is now #PCI-friendly category 2! Recommended submissions will receive a response within five days about whether or not another round peer-review is needed.

Announcement: www.uni-muenster.de/Ejournals/in...

Academia is brutal: Paywalls, replication crisis, intransparency, inequity, billion dollar donations in peer review, etc. Read in our inaugural editorial how R2 solves these problems. www.uni-muenster.de/Ejournals/in...

Just noticed that it says on Elsevier's Wikipedia page that the section on criticism of academic practices "may be too long to read and navigate comfortably". I think you should definitely give it a read!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevie...

PCI Psychology is open for submissions! Did you know that you can easily submit your recommended preprint to any of the 20+ PCI Psych friendly journals? See all friendly journals here: psych.peercommunityin.org/about/pci_fr...
#PsychSciSky #SciPub

Where to publish reproductions and replications? (At ReplicationResearch.org of course) But seriously: There are several journal dedicated to replications and reproductions!
For an overview of which journal accepts what types of studies:
forrt.org/replication_...

I agree! We discussed a few reasons why specialized journals are necessary and how they can help together with our colleagues from
@jcre.bsky.social
at www.econstor.eu/handle/10419.... For example, as a non-commercial journal, we can afford to evaluate studies based on quality and not outcomes.

ReplicationResearch.org is now open for submissions!

Submit replications and reproductions from many different fields, as well as conceptual contributions. With diamond OA, open and citable peer review reports, and reproducibility checks, we push the boundaries of open and fair publishing.

Should you do a replication (same data) or reproduction (different data)? Reproduction - if possible - is much easier and can inform replication attempts. Even without data, reproducibility can be assessed (eg via preregistrations). Here is our handbook's decision tree:
forrt.org/replication_...

What are current opinions on data format (especially csv vs. sav/SPSS)? Sönning&Roettger refer to site.uit.no/trolling saying that you should rather use csv but you can easily open sav with open source software. Also, sav can come with useful labels vs csv with encoding issues. Chapter: osf.io/drvnz

How to decide what to replicate or reproduce? We recommend priotizing studies with "high value" or unclear results, considering practical limits, watching for bias, and always communicate choices openly.

Handbook chapter: forrt.org/replication_handbook/choosing_study.html

YouTube video by Peer Community In PCI Webinar-Dorothy Bishop-How negligent publishers subvert quality control in scientific publishing

Timestamped link (27:48): youtu.be/0NJ87tYE8_s?... from #PCI webinar by @deevybee.bsky.social