ABSTRACT
Peer review is an important part of the scientific process, but traditional peer review at journals is coming under increased scrutiny for its inefficiency and lack of transparency. As preprints become more widely used and accepted, they raise the possibility of rethinking the peer-review process. Preprints are enabling new forms of peer review that have the potential to be more thorough, inclusive, and collegial than traditional journal peer review, and to thus fundamentally shift the culture of peer review toward constructive collaboration. In this Consensus View, we make a call to action to stakeholders in the community to accelerate the growing momentum of preprint sharing and provide recommendations to empower researchers to provide open and constructive peer review for preprints.
Subject(s)
Peer Review , Research Personnel , Humans , MotionABSTRACT
Scientific research increasingly relies on open source software (OSS). Funding OSS development requires intentional focus on issues of scholarly credit, unique forms of labor, maintenance, governance, and inclusive community-building. Such issues cut across different scientific disciplines that make them of interest to a variety of funders and institutions but may present challenges in understanding generalized needs. Here we present 10 simple rules for investing in scientific OSS and the teams who build and maintain it.
Subject(s)
SoftwareSubject(s)
Biomedical Research/trends , Publications , Humans , Internet , Social Media , Statistics as TopicABSTRACT
Ecological and sensorimotor theories of perception build on the notion of action-dependent invariants as the basic structures underlying perceptual capacities. In this paper we contrast the assumptions these theories make on the nature of perceptual information modulated by action. By focusing on the question, how movement specifies perceptual information, we show that ecological and sensorimotor theories endorse substantially different views about the role of action in perception. In particular we argue that ecological invariants are characterized with reference to transformations produced in the sensory array by movement: such invariants are transformation-specific but do not imply motor-specificity. In contrast, sensorimotor theories assume that perceptual invariants are intrinsically tied to specific movements. We show that this difference leads to different empirical predictions and we submit that the distinction between motor equivalence and motor-specificity needs further clarification in order to provide a more constrained account of action/perception relations.
