Aleksandra Urman

@AUrman21
269 Followers
136 Following
51 Posts

Postdoctoral researcher, Social Computing Group, University of Zurich. Political communication & computational social science

https://aleksandra-urman.ch/

@damiantrilling @cbaden haha or the question is "what's wrong with peer review" as I unfortunately heard of similar cases from more people than just @cbaden :(
We submitted a paper for review 8+ months ago. Last week I asked the editorial office when approximately we can expect the reviewer comments+decision. We just received a desk reject in response. After 8+ months "under review". I am furious and guess to which journal I am never ever submitting anything again...

Our recent paper on transparency reports was covered by Fast Company (featuring my comments on this too!) Read the coverage here https://www.fastcompany.com/90833376/big-tech-transparency-reports-are-a-big-mess

(And/or read the original paper here, it's open access https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2022.102477 )

Transparency reporting of big online platforms is by now a very common practice. But there is no unified standard. So what do individual companies include in their reports and what they don't? How DSA regulation might affect transparency reporting? Do any reports align with the (aspirational) Santa Clara Principles for transparency reporting? I & Mykola Makhortykh answer these and other questions in our new paper based on an analysis of 13 reports, read here open access! https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2022.102477
@kevinrothrock ironically? I wouldn't know where to start in the twitter sea of bad Russia content masters. Not ironically my very biased and probably unexpected suggestion is Pavel Lokshin (logged off twitter for the past 2 weeks, logged back and Lokshin is one of the few people whose coverage I missed). Maintains the balance (in different aspects) I wish more Russia twitter watchers would manage to maintain
One of my favorite things to do in the first lazy days of the new year is going through the Guardian's "next year in books" list they typically publish on Jan 1st and noting down those I wanna dig into once they are published next year. If it sounds like a thing you'd also enjoy, here is the link :) https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/dec/31/2023-in-books-highlights-for-the-year-ahead
2023 in books: highlights for the year ahead

The best fiction and nonfiction to look forward to in the new year, from Zadie Smith to Simon Schama, Margaret Atwood to Rory Stewart

The Guardian
My New Year's resolution is to make my thinking and writing less dependent on Web search. A thread about why and — if you buy my argument — a little about how, though I think the solution is different for everybody.

🧮 How can we measure #researchQuality in #psychology?

The #DORA declaration tells us what *not* to do. But what to do instead?

A working group (commissioned by the German Psychological Society & in the spirit of #CoARA) now proposed a way to practically measure research quality in hiring & promotion, w/o resorting to JIF or h-index.

1/

New research note with Julia Kling, @toepfl & @neilthurman where we map the website/app audiences of RT + Sputnik in 21 countries.

Using Comscore tracking data we find that their web/app reach before the invasion of Ukraine was <5% in each country, staying very roughly similar since 2019 (with country variation and occasional big spikes), though perhaps evidence of a decline in Sputnik reach.

We also find both are slightly more widely used by men and older age groups.

https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/mapping-the-website-and-mobile-app-audiences-of-russias-foreign-communication-outlets-rt-and-sputnik-across-21-countries/

Mapping the website and mobile app audiences of Russia’s foreign communication outlets, RT and Sputnik, across 21 countries | HKS Misinformation Review

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, policymakers worldwide have taken measures to curb the reach of Russia’s foreign communication outlets, RT and Sputnik. Mapping the audiences of these outlets in 21 countries, we show that in the quarter before the invasion, at least via their official websites and mobile apps, neither outlet reached more than 5% of the

Misinformation Review