@LFumarco @page_eco Yeah, good question. We definitely do think it applies to journal submissions—we think it's what's driving this paper (https://t.co/y86xH1QpkK) on the topic, eg. So I do think it's a good argument for anonymizing!
RT @MishaTeplitskiy: Great papers on statistical discrimination applied to peer review: Editors are more likely to accept authors or resea…
RT @MishaTeplitskiy: Great papers on statistical discrimination applied to peer review: Editors are more likely to accept authors or resea…
RT @MishaTeplitskiy: Great papers on statistical discrimination applied to peer review: Editors are more likely to accept authors or resea…
Great papers on statistical discrimination applied to peer review: Editors are more likely to accept authors or research programs they know more about, despite no difference in overall quality 1. https://t.co/FE4fyQDymw 2. https://t.co/lw6mK1j7xp
RT @MishaTeplitskiy: Should editors know the identities of submitting authors? https://t.co/lw6mK1j7xp
Important issues to foreground 👍
Should editors know the identities of submitting authors? https://t.co/lw6mK1j7xp
@enzoreds @CareyBrian Not on journal rankings specifically but this is on epistemic injustice in academic journals and would also have been unpublishable by your performative contradiction standard 😂 https://t.co/fnVz4U4OxU
RT @KevinZollman: As @RemcoHeesen there is also relevant information in the author's identity and so I also feel like I'm losing out on imp…
RT @KevinZollman: As @RemcoHeesen there is also relevant information in the author's identity and so I also feel like I'm losing out on imp…
As @RemcoHeesen there is also relevant information in the author's identity and so I also feel like I'm losing out on important information. https://t.co/dEzhNBfzIH
RT @RemcoHeesen: @lastpositivist Since you mentioned some of my work downthread, I thought it worth pointing out that in S4ff of this paper…
@lastpositivist Since you mentioned some of my work downthread, I thought it worth pointing out that in S4ff of this paper I consider the effect of something like Beckerian discrimination on journal editor preferences https://t.co/fnVz4U4OxU
@KevinZollman @gabriel_nyberg @litgenstein @lastpositivist @Philofscicomm @cailinmeister @CT_Bergstrom @siminevazire @jevinwest @lakens @LeonidTiokhin 👈 here is one tweet. 👇 here is another. There are at least two tweets (by me) in the world. Therefore, (m
@wgervais @psmaldino @siminevazire There's also this: When journal editors play favorites. https://t.co/vLJINLFXBw
@gravity_levity You might have a look at this paper by @RemcoHeesen https://t.co/dEzhNBfzIH
...is granted and not merely claimed. Thanks for dispelling them pernicious myths. Good points on eminence; somebody give Mickey an award! Yoel, keep waiting. 😉 I remain ambivalent - do we need celebrities in science? And you might find this interesting: h
RT @wijsbegeerte: In his paper 'When Journal Editors Play Favorites' (Philosopher's Annual Selection 2018), @RemcoHeesen advises that journ…
RT @wijsbegeerte: In his paper 'When Journal Editors Play Favorites' (Philosopher's Annual Selection 2018), @RemcoHeesen advises that journ…
RT @wijsbegeerte: In his paper 'When Journal Editors Play Favorites' (Philosopher's Annual Selection 2018), @RemcoHeesen advises that journ…
In his paper 'When Journal Editors Play Favorites' (Philosopher's Annual Selection 2018), @RemcoHeesen advises that journals from all fields use triple-anonymous procedures to avoid the epistemic injustice of connection and identity bias: https://t.co/krvH
Philosopher's Annual picks ten best papers each year. A paper by Remco Heesen is in the 2018 edition! 👌Find links to his selected paper 'When Journal Editors Play Favorites' and to the full Philosopher's Annual in his thread👇 [1 of 2]
Very interesting paper, trying to model a journal editor's decision, and how his/her familiarity with research could induce bias
Remco's article is called "When Journal Editors Play Favorites." Published (open access) version: https://t.co/dEzhNBfzIH
RT @lastpositivist: Really happy to see @RemcoHeesen's paper recognised in the Philosopher's Annual. Lovely piece of social epistemic analy…
RT @lastpositivist: Really happy to see @RemcoHeesen's paper recognised in the Philosopher's Annual. Lovely piece of social epistemic analy…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
RT @RemcoHeesen: Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual…
Happy to share that my paper "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" will be in the 2018 edition of the Philosopher's Annual. Especially nice as it's a form of post-publication peer review which I've argued in print we need more of! (see first comment) https
333 / #365papers: R. Heesen (2018), 'When journal editors play favorites', Philosophical Studies 175(4). https://t.co/V4FBdf9DWw
RT @lastpositivist: Open access social epistemology, evaluating case for various schemes for journal review. The pride of social epistemolo…
RT @PhilSciArchive: When Journal Editors Play Favorites https://t.co/iSesOcoyVM
When Journal Editors Play Favorites https://t.co/iSesOcoyVM
RT @lastpositivist: Open access social epistemology, evaluating case for various schemes for journal review. The pride of social epistemolo…
RT @KevinZollman: There are some surprising benefits from journal editors knowing their authors. @RemcoHeesen explains in the journal Philo…
There are some surprising benefits from journal editors knowing their authors. @RemcoHeesen explains in the journal Philosophical Studies. https://t.co/bPlHHs92VX
RT @profmdwhite: Remco Heesen, "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" (Philosophical Studies) #openaccess https://t.co/czTEBkDfyn
Remco Heesen, "When Journal Editors Play Favorites" (Philosophical Studies) #openaccess https://t.co/czTEBkDfyn
When journal editors play favorites, by @RemcoHeesen https://t.co/0Vm2qMLgD3
When Journal Editors Play Favorites https://t.co/OBdMgJ6tRR
Remco Heesen explores the scientific consequences of editors playing favorites. *Spoiler* it's better than you think https://t.co/jALgWBrQ9Z
Should editors of scientific journals practice triple-anonymous reviewing? https://t.co/0VeIoCRcYx