this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
1142 points (99.7% liked)

Science Memes

17432 readers
2402 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

This idea has been around over 20 years. It dies every time because major lab PIs, usually in US, HATE the idea of not being able to gatekeep research publications in journals of "high impact". This impacts how institutions are assessed, because, God forbid people actually have to read the papers. This feeds back to Editors, so the number one factor that influences Editors now is zip code.

If we went to a simple repository archive, with transparent peer review, then no one could imply their research is more important because of where it was published. We would let citations determine impact. Science publishing has always pushed the idea that if Einstein drove a Honda, everyone who drives a Honda is a genius.

Meanhile, The Lancet (JIF 105) took 12 years to retract a paper linking autism to vaccines, when it was clearly fraudulent from day one. Nature, Science, CELL, just stopped retractions, at best, they have "statements of Editorial Concern". This high JIF model is why Alzheimers research has stalled behind a flawed hypothesis only reinforced by fraudulent work not retracted for 25 years. Some people, like the President of Stanford, rose to the top tier on fraud and journal gatekeeping.

2020 saw the world arguing over ivermectin based off a paper "reviewed" overnight, with the journal Editor as an author. The journal 5 years later refuses to prove the paper was peer reviewed at all. 3,400 citations.

Then we have predatory journals that will publish literally anything for page charges. Examples:

Get me off your fucking mailing list.

collapsed inline media

and

Chicken, chicken chicken chicken, Chicken? chicken. (Cited 35 times)

collapsed inline media

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 3 points 52 minutes ago* (last edited 51 minutes ago) (2 children)

I have no clue how to improve this situation, but I appreciate this comment, especially the cited papers.

Chicken, chicken, chicken…

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 36 minutes ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago) (1 children)

It's simple. Have a central repository similar to Axriv or BioRxiv, but one step further where a manuscript is modified after peer review. The site publishes the paper and the peer reviews (few journals publish peer reviews). Readers can then decide if the science is valid, or not. It should be supported by a consortium of countries, because the world governments currently waste $13B a year on publication fees -that's money that should be in labs doing research.

The current situation is so broken, important research can get held up for YEARS by some cunt at Harvard or Stanford who wil delay the process while his/her lab catches up. Soem of these prize winners owe their careers to "inspiration" from studies they reviewed and rejected.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 30 minutes ago* (last edited 29 minutes ago)

The site publishes the paper and the peer reviews (few journals publish peer reviews). Readers can then decide if the science is valid, or not.

…So like Wikipedia for papers? With the “peer review” being the discussion section?

That sounds like a great project for Wikimedia TBH. That + Arixv's nice frontend is literally the stack to do it. And they have the name recognition to draw people in.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 42 minutes ago

It was a game changer for chicken. Still anticipated for the first Chicken Nobel Prize. Spun off three chicken companies.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 1 points 52 minutes ago (1 children)

What does PI mean (first sentence of your post)?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 43 minutes ago

Principal Investigator, the person who heads a lab. Typically a university Professor at the rank of Assistant, Associate or full Professor.