Daniel Gorelick

Congrats! She's not just a Sloan Fellow and an amazing scientist, she's also one of the academic editors @biologyopen.bsky.social

First time I see a journal paying its reviewers.
Great move of @biologyopen.bsky.social! 👏👏👏

Probably, being a society-owned journal makes a difference 😉

These winter games have nothing on Texas. The most dangerous professional sport in the world is rodeo bull riding.

Yes, we are doing that analysis for 2025. Was not in 2024 data because sample size too small (& half the pool couldn’t say no due to how the contract was structured).

Read Read chapter University of California, Davis: Stop

Sounds like a 'Stop Passing the Harasser' policy could have been helpful www.nationalacademies.org/read/26565

There's also programs like 'Stop Passing the Harasser' where candidates can waive confidentiality and allow prospective employers to request info from prior/current employers on harassment/misconduct investigations. U Wisc and UC-Davis both do this, not sure how widespread it is yet

Yes...but this is definitely an area for improvement (ie, need more resources to improve screening). Occasionally we get a subpar review during the peer review process & so we don't pay or hire that person again. But it more would be more efficient to screen reviewers better before they review

I love the sentiment, but I wouldn't condone the waste of paper lol. Here's the preprint with results from 2024 (much smaller sample size than we have for 2025, but it's a promising start) www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

It is going great! No reduction in review quality, if anything quality is going up w/paying reviewers, we are quantifying data now & hope to preprint results from 2025 soon journals.biologists.com/bio/pages/fa...

Have you applied to be a reviewer @biologyopen.bsky.social ? pays £220/manuscript journals.biologists.com/bio/pages/fa...

paying peer reviewers can work journals.biologists.com/bio/pages/fa...

@biologyopen.bsky.social pays peer reviewers £220/manuscript, and they've seen no reduction in quality (anecdotally, quality is improving, quantifying the data for 2205 now for a preprint to be posted soon). Biology Open precontracts w/reviewers & no pay if review is low quality (or late)

A promotional graphic for a workshop titled “Integrating Multi-Modal, Multi-Scale Models of Cardiovascular Disease Mechanisms.” The word “Workshop” appears in yellow at the top left, with the main title in large white text on a black background. Below, it lists the organisers: Jennifer Davis, Christine Mummery and Beth Pruitt. On the right, there is a yellow box stating: “Early-career researchers apply for funded places.” Bottom right shows the dates “8–11 November 2026” and the location “Buxted Park, East Sussex, UK.” Bottom left displays The Company of Biologists logo.

Applications are now open for funded ECR places at our Workshop 'Integrating Multi-Modal, Multi-Scale Models of Cardiovascular Disease Mechanisms', organised by Jennifer Davis, Christine Mummery & Beth Pruitt. Find out more & apply to attend: biologists.com/workshops/no...

@sharday-penn.bsky.social

The Lise Meitner Excellence Programme is designed to attract and specifically promote exceptionally qualified female scientists.

A position with prospects! We offer excellent researchers again the possibility to apply for a position as a Leader of a Lise Meitner Research Group in all areas of #science. Applications are possible between February 11th and April 15th, 2026. www.mpg.de/lise-meitner... #lisemeitnergroups

What's great about these global south travel grants? The money gets disbursed immediately after the winners are announced. Grantees can use the money to book travel, no paying out of pocket, no reimbursement necessary

Postdoc job alert in the Crick Institute in London. Are you interested in the actin cytoskeleton? I am looking for a postdoc to examine the cellular, developmental or physiological role of Arp2/3 iso-complex driven actin polymerisation. Multiple aspects available.
crick.ac.uk/WayPostdoc2026

Could this tool also be used to evaluate 2 different human reviews of the same manuscript, see how well both reviews did in terms of identifying claims, etc? Give journals some way to review the reviewers?

Yes, historically. Decades ago. I’m wondering about today. Do librarians today rely on JIF? Other metrics when making subscription decisions?

I’m also unsure how NIH’s immediate open-access requirement is changing things. Are libraries cancelling subscriptions, negotiating harder, or expecting something different? Librarians: I’d love to learn. Replies or DMs welcome.
#AcademicPublishing #ResearchPublishing #AcademicSky #PeerReview

For example, Biology Open (published by nonprofit @biologists.bsky.social) provides decisions with reviews in 7 business days, by pre-contracting with and paying peer reviewers. Does something like this register for libraries, or is it irrelevant?
journals.biologists.com/bio/pages/fa...

I’m especially curious whether author experience enters into these decisions at all. Editors spend a lot of time trying to improve peer review, but does that matter from a library perspective?

I’m at Baylor College of Medicine @bcmhouston.bsky.social part of the Texas Medical Center, which provides library services across multiple institutions. I don’t know how TMC evaluates journals or how price negotiations work. Usage? Cost? Prestige? OA terms? Publisher track record?

As biomedical researchers/editors, we spend a lot of time thinking about peer review, rigor, speed, and cost. But librarians ultimately shape what science is accessible, and I don’t really understand how those decisions get made.

How do librarians decide which peer-reviewed biomedical journals are worth subscribing to?

Genuine question from a journal editor who’s realizing this is a huge blind spot.

Another mess from Bhattacharya at "Reclaiming Science"...

He talked about John Ioannidis's paper "in 2006"... "with the audacious title 'Why most published, peer reviewed scientific research papers are false'" that is "three pages long".

1/9

Because of technical issues with the SciENcv website, NIH is extending a period of leniency accepting old format biosketches through May 2026 (see FAQ #5):

grants.nih.gov/faqs#/common...

For scientists choosing where to build their careers, these questions are essential, and they shape who decides the U.S. is, or isn’t, a viable place to do science.

From my experience, many U.S. institutions are not well prepared (or willing) to support international trainees when uncertainty arises. That reality weighs heavily on students deciding where to train.

I didn’t have good answers, only advice to ask universities directly what support they actually provide. Like: Will the institution help with visa renewals? Is legal support available if immigration issues arise? What resources exist for international trainees during periods of uncertainty?

It was about life in the U.S.:
What’s it like living and working there?
Will I be able to travel home to see my family?
Will I feel secure as an immigrant?