Are scientific journals just parasites? (with Chris Chambers)

1. Adopt Registered Reports for Research

For appropriate research, submit a detailed protocol for peer review before conducting the study to secure in-principle acceptance, ensuring publication regardless of results. This neutralizes outcome and publication bias, focusing evaluation on methodological quality and question importance.

2. Prioritize Quality Over Flashy Results

As a researcher, prioritize conducting high-quality, rigorous work over seeking exciting or novel results, as the scientific record should be determined by work quality, not outcomes. This helps prevent a lopsided literature and self-deception.

3. Embrace Transparency in Research

Be transparent about all analyses, including exploratory ones, and avoid reinventing history to present post-hoc discoveries as predictions. This ensures the scientific record is accurate and prevents misleading conclusions.

4. Publish All Rigorous Research Findings

Publish the outcomes of all rigorous research, including negative, inconclusive, or assumption-challenging findings, potentially using formats like Registered Reports. This prevents others from repeating mistakes and makes the best use of scientific resources.

5. Share Research Data Publicly

Publish data sets, even if not fully used in your research, with appropriate anonymization, especially for publicly funded work. This allows the broader scientific community to benefit from collected data and advances knowledge.

6. Shift Peer Review Control

Advocate for and participate in initiatives that shift control of the peer review process from commercial publishers to the academic community, such as using preprints and non-profit peer review entities. This reduces publishing costs and ensures the process serves scientific, not corporate, interests.

7. Reform Researcher Evaluation Criteria

As an academic, advocate for and implement changes in hiring, promotion, and assessment panels to value open science practices (e.g., data sharing, pre-registration) and the quality of research, rather than relying on crude heuristics like journal prestige or grant money.

8. Utilize Preprints for Dissemination

Publish research as preprints on public websites before formal journal submission to rapidly share findings, initiate community discussion, and allow for versioning and corrections. This makes science more accessible and dynamic, moving beyond an 18th-century fixed record model.

9. Exercise Caution with Citation Counts

View citation counts as a measure of short-term impact, not necessarily an indication of research quality. Avoid relying on them as a superficial metric for evaluating work or scientists.

10. Ensure Balanced and Ethical Citations

As an author, ensure citations are properly balanced and avoid strategically omitting contradictory work. As a reviewer, avoid coercing authors into inappropriate citations.

11. Practice Responsible Science Communication

When communicating science to the public or journalists, ensure press releases and discussions are as careful, factual, and free of spin as possible. This is crucial as many journalists may lack deep scientific training.

12. Distinguish Science Record from News

Recognize that the scientific record should publish research based solely on quality, regardless of outcome, while a separate layer can highlight ‘cool’ or newsworthy findings. This prevents blurring and distortion of scientific priorities.

13. Embrace Disagreement and Lack Consensus

Recognize that lack of consensus is normal and healthy in many areas of science, especially for newer theories, and is not necessarily a sign of failure. This fosters critical thinking and ongoing scientific inquiry.

14. Continuously Learn and Seek Understanding

Make a habit of constantly taking in information from a wide variety of sources (scientific papers, articles, books) to build broad knowledge and deeply understand the structure and models of various phenomena. This fosters intellectual growth and expertise.