ReconfigBehSci on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved 5 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1325749905911123968

PRINCIPIA - Decentralized peer review. (n.d.). Retrieved 5 March 2021, from http://www.principia.network/

Conference Details. (n.d.). AIMOS. Retrieved 5 March 2021, from https://aimos.community/2020-details

Write That PhD. (2020, October 31). Doing a systematic review? How to prepare, conduct & document a search + manage your results & screening tools https://t.co/xdAC35VmaK #phdchat #phdadvice #phdforum #phdlife #ecrchat #acwri https://t.co/sh62MypqOi [Tweet]. @WriteThatPhD. https://twitter.com/WriteThatPhD/status/1322467814733713408

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘Great presentation by Cooper Smout on @proFOK for trying to overcome the collective action problem of open science #scibeh2020 https://t.co/Gsr66BRGcJ’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1325749613731713024

Maarten van Smeden on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/MaartenvSmeden/status/1328093246829064192

Market, R. T. (n.d.). Build trust through criticism. Red Team Market. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://redteammarket.com/

Scholars reflect on Wikipedia’s 20 years of crowdsourced knowledge | Books, Et Al. (n.d.). Retrieved March 3, 2021, from https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2020/11/02/wikipedia-at-20/?utm_campaign=SciMag&utm_source=JHubbard&utm_medium=Twitter

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved 1 March 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1354456391772229632

Mice? Is it trying to refer to the miniscule space a sensory event occupies in our brains?

Nicola Low #EveryDayCounts #StillFBPE on Twitter. (2020). Twitter. Retrieved 27 February 2021, from https://twitter.com/nicolamlow/status/1336958661151821825

Heesen, R., & Bright, L. K. (2020). Is Peer Review a Good Idea? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 000–000. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz029

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter. (2020). Twitter. Retrieved 27 February 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1339855911796543488

Howard, J., Huang, A., Li, Z., Tufekci, Z., Zdimal, V., Westhuizen, H.-M. van der, Delft, A. von, Price, A., Fridman, L., Tang, L.-H., Tang, V., Watson, G. L., Bax, C. E., Shaikh, R., Questier, F., Hernandez, D., Chu, L. F., Ramirez, C. M., & Rimoin, A. W. (2021). An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(4). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2014564118

Health Nerd on Twitter. (2020). Twitter. Retrieved 26 February 2021, from https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1327872397794439168

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘I just had cause to revisit the Friston modelling paper from Sept: Https://t.co/QOTC8fXV0n 1/n’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 26 February 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1336277391233208320

Deevybee. (2020, December 6). BishopBlog: Faux peer-reviewed journals: a threat to research integrity. BishopBlog. http://deevybee.blogspot.com/2020/12/faux-peer-reviewed-journals-threat-to.html

Dr Elaine Toomey on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved 24 February 2021, from https://twitter.com/ElaineToomey1/status/1357343820417933316

u/dawnlxh. (2021). Reviewing peer review: does the process need to change, and how?. r/BehSciAsk. Reddit

Trovò, B., & Massari, N. (2021). Ants-Review: A Protocol for Incentivized Open Peer-Reviews on Ethereum. ArXiv:2101.09378 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.09378

Group, B. M. J. P. (2021). Update to living systematic review on prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19. BMJ, 372, n236. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n236

Edited sections are highlighter. Srikrishna please review

Dubé, E., Gagnon, D., & MacDonald, N. E. (2015). Strategies intended to address vaccine hesitancy: Review of published reviews. Vaccine, 33(34), 4191–4203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.041

This is an untested statement and does not take into account the perspectives of those contributing to the publishers' revenue. The Rights Retention Strategy (RRS) relies on the author's accepted manuscript (AAM) and for an AAM to exist and to have the added value from peer-review a Version of Record (VoR) must exist. Libraries recognise this fundamental principle and continue to subscribe to individual journals of merit and support lucrative deals with publishers. From some (not all) librarians' and possibly funders' perspectives these statements could undermine any mutual respect.

Brown, K. F., Kroll, J. S., Hudson, M. J., Ramsay, M., Green, J., Long, S. J., Vincent, C. A., Fraser, G., & Sevdalis, N. (2010). Factors underlying parental decisions about combination childhood vaccinations including MMR: A systematic review. Vaccine, 28(26), 4235–4248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.04.052

Brewer, N. T., DeFrank, J. T., & Gilkey, M. B. (2016). Anticipated Regret and Health Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Health Psychology : Official Journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 35(11), 1264–1275. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000294

2019-9-1，再次找到第一次看吴军老师写的本质还有见识那种感觉，对科技演进的表述提供了另外一个纬度看历史发展的见解。对能量的使用效率，以及对信息的应用效率解释人类发展史的一切。但这足够么？是个问题。希望下次能够带着问题和其他的见解再读一次。不要让这种收获的感觉来的太简单了，不然就是对书对知识的不负责任！

2021-1-30，追着书评又来看了一眼这本书。更像是一本科技史百科，中间穿插了很多概念，很多案例，也讲了一个洞察和认知。比如爱因斯坦悖论，比如科学是演进出来的而非发明出来的等等。

要让我再看一次估计够呛，半个小时翻一下特性的有兴趣的章节倒是没啥问题。可读性在那摆着呢。

多人推荐5星，科学哲学史 可当兴趣，不应该在今年的书单内

左其盛推荐4星 沟通类书单，可以看，虽然内容比较散乱

得到的课程之前也买过，没有听完整。这本书应该就是文字版本。两个可以对照的来看

可证伪这种东西是科学思维的基础，可以应用在所有学科上的

这本书的内核就是心理学也需要被证明才能叫做科学

左其盛推荐5星也是我第一次读这本书的原因 总的来说值得读第二遍

ReconfigBehSci [@SciBeh] (2020-01-27) new post on Scibeh's meta-science reddit describing the new rubric for peer review of preprints aimed at broadening the pool of potential 'reviewers' so that students could provide evaluations as well! https://reddit.com/r/BehSciMeta/comments/l64y1l/reviewing_peer_review_does_the_process_need_to/ please take a look and provide feedback! Twitter. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1354456393877749763

左其盛4星，我感觉就三星把

一样，可以扫读，结构性阅读。做好笔记和书摘就行。之后当成素材库就行。

左其盛4星 看过一遍，做过批注，但是批注找不到了 没关系，再一个小时的事情。而且是可以作为日常出现沟通问题时找答案的一本书 但是就通读一下，梳理一下结构。梳理完了以后结合公司现状做个培训 p2把，找个书友一起看，一起输出

4星，值得看，且值得在摸清商业模式准备好融资架构的前提下，最早看的一本关于融资的书

可看，大概在年中的时候必看。 因为要设计公司结构了，前提是明确业务方向、目标、模型的洞察，以及对团队能力的深度了解。

网上找不到资源，已经在知乎上问作者要了。

目测是一本好的入门书籍。 给人的最大的价值是区分好钱还钱，以及明确一些坑。

针对基金投资者的书籍，也针对那些已经ipo的或者将要ipo的证券部门负责人看会更合适。

至于对那些想要了解投资人逻辑，定位产品和企业商业价值的初期产品经理来讲，没有太大价值。

不涉及到财务洞见，也不涉及到创新的偏好。这本书更重的实际还是资本逻辑。创新也只是一个边界条件而已。

远比另外一本医疗创新的书要好

五星内容，五星书评，五星相关，可看。

有帮助，有一定的借鉴价值，但是总体来说要看的优先级不高

书本身是5星，对我来讲可能近期只有3星

和其他创新的书籍能够互相印证

5颗星的书评，5颗星的总结，5颗星的内容摘抄

值得一看

Dubé, E., Laberge, C., Guay, M., Bramadat, P., Roy, R., & Bettinger, J. A. (2013). Vaccine hesitancy. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 9(8), 1763–1773. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.24657

Mambrini. A. Baronchelli. A. Starnini. M. Marinazzo. D. De Domenico, M. (2020) .PRINCIPIA: a Decentralized Peer-Review Ecosystem. Retrieved from: chrome-extension://bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F2008.09011.pdf

Landoni, M., & Chiara, I. (2020). IPV and COVID-19: A systematic review of the literature. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nqgbx

Burlington

referendum review of credit pledge

I learnt a lot from this article's structure for introduction. The author started with the difference between stressed and unstressed vowel, and transitioned to the explanation of schwa's articulatory features, and to the phonological environments schwas occur.

Soderberg, C. K., Errington, T., Schiavone, S. R., Bottesini, J. G., Thorn, F. S., Vazire, S., Esterling, K. M., & Nosek, B. A. (2020). Research Quality of Registered Reports Compared to the Traditional Publishing Model. MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/7x9vy

Zhang, Y., & Cook, C. (2020). A Rapid Scoping Review of Publications Examining Psychological Impacts of COVID-19 in China. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2uadr

Brown, R. C. H., Kelly, D., Wilkinson, D., & Savulescu, J. (2020). The scientific and ethical feasibility of immunity passports. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30766-0

Health Nerd on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved October 17, 2020, from https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1316511734115385344

Yang Chan, E. Y., Shahzada, T. S., Sham, T. S. T., Dubois, C., Huang, Z., Liu, S., Ho, J. Y., Hung, K. K. C., Kwok, K. O., & Shaw, R. (n.d.). Narrative review of non-pharmaceutical behavioural measures for the prevention of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) based on the Health-EDRM framework. British Medical Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldaa030

r/BehSciResearch—Review on combatting the COVID misinformation flood. (n.d.). Reddit. Retrieved October 12, 2020, from https://www.reddit.com/r/BehSciResearch/comments/j9mrlp/review_on_combatting_the_covid_misinformation/

This is reminiscent of the idea that indigenous peoples regularly met at annual feasts to not only celebrate, but to review over their memory palaces and perform their rituals as a means of reviewing and strengthening their memories and ideas.

Do your colleagues who read your work, annotate it, and comment on it not count as peer-review?

Am I wasting my time by annotating all of this? :) (I don't think so...)

For a while I've been doing PESOS from reading.am to my website privately. Then a day or so later I come back to the piece to think about it again and post any additional thoughts, add tags, etc. I often find that things I missed the first time around manage to resurface. Unless I've got a good reason not to I usually then publish it.

lit review

PREreview, Daniela Saderi, Ph D. , Co-Founder and Director of. ‘Crowdsourcing Preprint Reviews: PREreview and COS Call for Feedback on Infrastructure Integration’. Accessed 2 October 2020. https://www.cos.io/blog/prereview-and-cos-call-for-feedback-on-infrastructure-integration.

Prof Fiona Fidler | Collaborative assessment for trustworthy science: The repliCATS project. (2020, July 27). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhDKzEsPouI&feature=youtu.be

Merrill, K. A., William, T., Joyce, K. M., Roos, L. E., & Protudjer, J. (2020). Potential psychosocial impact of COVID-19 on children: A scoping review of pandemics & epidemics [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ucdg9

Daniël Lakens on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved September 23, 2020, from https://twitter.com/lakens/status/1308115862247952386

The Contagion Externality of a Superspreading Event: The Sturgis Motorcycle Rally and COVID-19 | NCRC. (2020, September 3). 2019 Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium (NCRC). https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/research/the-contagion-externality-of-a-superspreading-event-the-sturgis-motorcycle-rally-and-covid-19/

Offeddu, V., Yung, C. F., Low, M. S. F., & Tam, C. C. (2017). Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 65(11), 1934–1942. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix681

Giles, J. R., Erbach-Schoenberg, E. zu, Tatem, A. J., Gardner, L., Bjørnstad, O. N., Metcalf, C. J. E., & Wesolowski, A. (2020). The duration of travel impacts the spatial dynamics of infectious diseases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(36), 22572–22579. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1922663117

Siemieniuk, R. A., Bartoszko, J. J., Ge, L., Zeraatkar, D., Izcovich, A., Kum, E., Pardo-Hernandez, H., Rochwerg, B., Lamontagne, F., Han, M. A., Liu, Q., Agarwal, A., Agoritsas, T., Chu, D. K., Couban, R., Darzi, A., Devji, T., Fang, B., Fang, C., … Brignardello-Petersen, R. (2020). Drug treatments for covid-19: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ, 370. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2980

JNOLive | Multiplicity of Randomized Clinical Trials for Coronavirus Disease 2019. (2020, July 14). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-MWPqgLUvA&feature=youtu.be

Max Primbs on Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved September 14, 2020, from https://twitter.com/MaxPrimbs/status/1304516869509066760

Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview • Dashboard. (n.d.). Retrieved September 11, 2020, from https://outbreaksci.prereview.org/dashboard?q=COVID-19&q=Coronavirus&q=SARS-CoV-2

Rapid Reviews COVID-19. (n.d.). Rapid Reviews COVID-19. Retrieved September 11, 2020, from https://rapidreviewscovid19.mitpress.mit.edu/

Marcus, A. A. (2020, September 8). COVID-19 arrived on a meteorite, claims Elsevier book chapter. Retraction Watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2020/09/08/covid-19-arrived-on-a-meteorite-claims-elsevier-book-chapter/

r/BehSciMeta - Comment by u/dawnlxh on ”A completely re-imagined approach to peer review and publishing: PRINCIPIA”. (n.d.). Reddit. Retrieved September 10, 2020, from https://www.reddit.com/r/BehSciMeta/comments/if03sk/a_completely_reimagined_approach_to_peer_review/g4nnuc5

Rajkumar, R. P. (2020). Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Suicide: Conceptual and Practical Considerations [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/z7drs

Paudel, Dhirendra. ‘ABC Framework of Fear of COVID-19 for Psychotherapeutic Intervention in Nepal: A Review’. Preprint. PsyArXiv, 4 September 2020. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/9sj4a.

BAME COVID-19 DEATHS - What do we know? Rapid Data & Evidence Review. (n.d.). CEBM. Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/bame-covid-19-deaths-what-do-we-know-rapid-data-evidence-review/

r/BehSciMeta—No appeasement of bad faith actors. (n.d.). Reddit. Retrieved June 2, 2020, from https://www.reddit.com/r/BehSciMeta/comments/gv0y99/no_appeasement_of_bad_faith_actors/

Clements, J. C. (2020). Don’t be a prig in peer review. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02512-0

Kapatel, P. M., & Malik, N. ara. (2020). Probable immersions for novel Coronavirus and its preventions: A systematic review [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/y34uv

Smith, C. F., Drew, S., Ziebland, S., & Nicholson, B. D. (2020). Understanding the role of GPs’ gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence. British Journal of General Practice, 70(698), e612–e621. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X712301

About | OpenReview. (n.d.). Retrieved May 30, 2020, from https://openreview.net/about

Larsen, D., Dinero, R. E., Asiago-Reddy, E., Green, H., Lane, S., Shaw, A., Zeng, T., & Kmush, B. (2020). A review of infectious disease surveillance to inform public health action against the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/uwdr6

Acosta, M., & Nestore, M. (2020). Comparing public policy implementation in Taiwan and Vietnam in the early stages of the COVID-19 outbreak: A review [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/69hqx