Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12h

Could've sworn this got one already. I guess is one of those perennial candidates.

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 1d

To be fair, I'm genuinely worried about a flood of trivial and false findings before we even move to trivial and true or true and interesting #OverlyHonestEditor

Ethan Mollick @emollick.bsky.social · 2d

A lot of people are worried about a flood of trivial but true findings, but we should be just as concerned about how to handle a flood of interesting and potentially true findings. The selection & canonization process in science has been collapsing already, with no good solution

3

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 6d

@depthsofwikipedia.bsky.social
@musicnotation.bsky.social

Reposted by Overly.Honest.Editor

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 6d

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you:

"I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

The Royal Society @royalsociety.org · 7d

"I am increasingly concerned over threats to the values that allow science to flourish." Read the full statement from the President of the Royal Society Sir Adrian Smith: royalsociety.org/news/2025/10...

A statement from the President of the Royal Society | Royal Society

A statement from the President of the Royal Society regarding threats to the values that allow science to flourish.

royalsociety.org

1 3 7

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 6d

Middle-truthism at its best 🤮

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 6d

Is what no self respecting leader said, ever. And yet her we are, again.

2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 6d

Here, @royalsociety.org, I fixed that quote for you:

"I'm increasingly concerned over fascist behaviour of our fellows that threatens both science and, literally, lives of other fellows, but I'm so spineless I will do nothing about it but moan."

The Royal Society @royalsociety.org · 7d

"I am increasingly concerned over threats to the values that allow science to flourish." Read the full statement from the President of the Royal Society Sir Adrian Smith: royalsociety.org/news/2025/10...

A statement from the President of the Royal Society | Royal Society

A statement from the President of the Royal Society regarding threats to the values that allow science to flourish.

royalsociety.org

1 3 7

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 8d

Omg, had to re-read to make sure I didn't misunderstand. Has a TOC written this column?

2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 11d

Ha, missed that completely. Thanks a lot though.

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 11d

Completely lost my Google mojo. Please help @aaronclauset.bsky.social?

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 11d

Sounds like a fascinating paper in @science.org Sci Advances, if you can find it, that is #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview

Whose papers have an edge at Science? In unusual study, journal looks in the mirror

Confidential data show being in the U.S., at a prestigious institution, and in a large team all may help

www.science.org

1 1 2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 12d

Would it be legally binding as IP waiver?

Reposted by Overly.Honest.Editor

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

Spick & Richardson offer advice to editors on how to avoid formulaic research #ResearchIntegrity #ScientificPublishing #PeerReview While I admire enthusiasm this is, forgive my cynicism, preaching to editors #OverlyCynicalEditor 1/

European Association of Science Editors @easeeditors.bsky.social · 15d

In this new ESE Viewpoint, @reeserichardson.bsky.social and Matt Spick help editors identify mass-produced research to reject them at the point of submission, reducing the burden on peer review, and the amount of poor-quality noise introduced to the published literature.

doi.org/10.3897/ese....

2 1 2

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

Can't decide if that's sarcasm, given that this was just an unfiltered editorial rant :P

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

Oh but if you want to try GRABDROP anyway, paper is here: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40587200/

Journal of Global Health's Guidelines for Reporting Analyses of Big Data Repositories Open to the Public (GRABDROP): preventing 'paper mills', duplicate publications, misuse of statistical inference, ...

In recent years, global accessibility to large 'big data' repositories that enable 'open research' - such as the UK Biobank, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), and Global Burde...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

1 1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

So here is my likely very #UnpopularOpinion and advice on these: there is no replacement for sensible editorial judgement, but also we need to get comfortable with the idea that even with the most competent editors out there we will see this type of papers published. #ScientificPublishing 13/13

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

I suspect, and people should feel free to verify this, that majority of formulaic papers are one-offs for their authors. And so asking how many NHANES papers have you published recently will do exactly nothing to stem the tide of these submissions. 12/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

And you don't need checklist for the first - you just need, well, common sense. And the other is an incredibly invasive question that is also a dangerous slippery slope in how we evaluate research. It is also pointless because we have Google for that. More importantly - and here is a spoiler - 11/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

And so I don't know. I've mixed feelings about the GRABDROP checklist mentioned in that piece, because while well intentioned it amounts to saying we should: use common sense in editorial assessment & ask authors to disclose if they did similar research before. 10/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

And there are reasons the implementation is poor: it's lack of training, lack of understanding, lack of resources.

On the other end, it's also lack of appreciation that checklists don't fix everything & that sometimes you need flexibility to diverge from the tools shaped by mainstream consensus 9/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

Or what is the point of a checklist asking for power calculation, if it's there but is incorrect or is there but then the sample size is not reached or is there but is clearly done post hoc, and so on and so forth and so the world turns... 8/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

The issue is that the last point is barely ever done (and the second point is done only a tiny bit more, but not much). And we should ask what is the point of a checklist for RCT which asks was this study pre-registered, if someone can just say "no" and it's fine because the checklist is there? 7/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

But what do I mean by correctly applied checklist? I mean that:
- it is provided by authors,
- it is checked by evaluators,
- if items are missing or indicative that research was poorly/incorrectly conducted, ppl are sent packing. 6/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

No one dies in the immediate aftermath of poorly executed reporting checklist tho. And even if they did, there is no legal framework for prosecuting anyone for that. If it existed, it's also not clear who should be prosecuted: editors? Reviewers? Authors? Admin of institution overseeing research? 5/

1

Overly.Honest.Editor @editoratlarge.bsky.social · 14d

If you miscount the number of surgical towels and miss that you left one inside the patient, you can literally (and I mean literally - literally) kill them.

If you ignore safety check on an important indicator before the flight, you may end up killing not just your passengers but also yourself. 4/

1