I recently participated as a reviewer in the rOpenSci onboarding process for Open Science related R packages. It got me thinking about whether ACEMS could provide a similar service: Voluntarily review eachother's research outputs with a view to making them the best they can be.
'Best' could be measured along several criteria, but I would be particularly interested in maximising reproducibility.
If we thought this was a good idea, the only place I can see it being started from is the ECR group. I'd be interested in hearing feedback on this idea, including:
Other things reviews could consider.
Other ways the ECR network can be used to the benefit of its members.
I recently participated as a reviewer in the rOpenSci onboarding process for Open Science related R packages. It got me thinking about whether ACEMS could provide a similar service: Voluntarily review eachother's research outputs with a view to making them the best they can be.
'Best' could be measured along several criteria, but I would be particularly interested in maximising reproducibility.
If we thought this was a good idea, the only place I can see it being started from is the ECR group. I'd be interested in hearing feedback on this idea, including: