New diamond open access outlet for developmental psych. Free to publish, free to read, and led by a great team. One more step away from for-profit publishers.

We had an amazing time at the University of Münster. Our replicators covered papers across psychology, public health and political science! Huge thanks to @bschlipphak.bsky.social, Katrin Schmietendorf, @aufdroeseler.bsky.social and Oliver Kamps for organizing.

@lukaswallrich.bsky.social is doing a hands-on: Doing an AI-led reproduction and comparing models. Here is a random example from his slights about how agents perform on the "deadly femal hurricanes" study (10.1073/pnas.1402786111).

Oh, thank you! How could I have forgotten about this? I 100% agree on university presses.

Can you elaborate on what you learned from Amsterdam? I think (some of) the authors do not have a permanent position and publishing with Routledge in their field may have positive effects on their assessment.

Yes. They suggested an institutional repository (free for the authors) and an institutional service for book publishing (which, if it is like the one at my institution, would probably cost the authors less than 1% of the Routledge price).

Later in the discussion, somebody asked the presenters/authors: Why have you published with Routledge at all? >> We are still at a point, where such things are important for funding and for individual careers...

What journal is this for?

Very interesting discussions are happening at @forrt.bsky.social's AI in meta-science conference. For example: You can now produce a paper every hour. Will the literature be entirely unusable without another layer of AI or will there be a bifurcation for low- vs high-effort papers? Can PRC work?

🔍 What is the current status of Open Science in the academic publishing system? Join us for an IGOR panel discussion: “Rethinking Scholarly Publishing: Preserving the Good, Changing the Bad, and Supporting the New” 📅 Thursday, 1 Oct | 10:00–11:00 CET 💻 Online (contact us for the link) [1/2]