Mastodawn

RE: https://neuromatch.social/@neuralreckoning/116286691385862197

Science would be so much better if we did review (of grants and papers) constructively and collaboratively, instead of only using them to produce binary accept/reject decisions. To do that, we have to separate review processes from decisions. One idea for grants 👇

Show thread

Koen Hufkens, PhD 6d ago

@neuralreckoning If you have a diverse set of co-authors who care you don't need this IMO.

Show thread

Dan Goodman 6d ago

@koen_hufkens yes but I think there's value in having someone who isn't implicated and doesn't have a direct stake in it take part. That offers something extra.

Show thread

Koen Hufkens, PhD

@neuralreckoning I think this should have ended up elsewhere in the thread.

Anyway, point being rejections of any kind are often caused by not reading the room (call) or a lack of diversity. These days I find the feedback on project calls often good and granular as they are graded. Manuscripts is another thing though.