I am sure that many of these ideas will be expressed in other venues. However, we here wish to make a space available for constructive suggestions by those who wish to comment in depth but do not have another forum to do so.
These ideas will play out as a series of guests posts - as opposed to the back and forth in comment sections. We are striving for well-considered and deliberate ideas, rather than knee-jerk comments, criticisms, or the like.
These posts will not be about the Pruitt data debate specifically - but rather more general comments on how to improve the process overall - regardless of what happens with those papers.
These posts will be moderated by myself (Andrew Hendry). Please send me an email (email@example.com) if you would like to write one.
#IntegrityAndTrust 1. Publish statements on how data integrity was assured.
By Pedro Peres-Neto.
By Pedro Peres-Neto.
#IntegrityAndTrust 2. The role of teamwork in research ethics and integrity.
By Steven Cooke.
#IntegrityAndTrust 3. Collaborate and share: data analysis practices are key to science credibility and reproducibility
By Jacob Brownscombe.
#IntegrityAndTrust 4. Building environments that promote data integrity
By Grant Haines and others.
#IntegrityAndTrust 5. With Data Editors, everyone wins
By Andrew Hendry.
COMPILING SOME EXTERNAL POSTS
Trust Your Collaborators
By Joan Strassmann
Publish and Perish: A Graduate Student Perspective
By Alexandra McInturf
Data Dilemmas in Animal Behavior
To the early career scientists affected by #PruittData
By Wayne Maddison
Social Spider Research is Here to Stay
On Luck, Success, and Becoming a Professor
By Aleeza Gerstein
Although this forum will not be specifically about the Pruitt data or controversy, I should make clear that:
1. I have never evaluated Jonathan or his work in any context. That is, I never reviewed any of his proposals or papers as reviewer, editor, or panel member. Nor have I provided assessment letters for his job applications or tenure or promotion. I have not been involved in any of the assessments of the data that is currently being questioned - although I have certainly heard about these issues as they unfolded. I have not collaborated with Jonathan, nor did I have any plans in place to do so.
2. I have met Jonathan at several meetings and when I visited his university for a seminar. I enjoyed meeting and talking with him, and he contributed a joke picture to #PeopleWhoFellAsleepReadingMyBook that I posted on twitter. Since, the controversy has erupted into public consciousness, I have emailed Jonathan offering him this blog as a venue should he wish to respond to the criticisms - and then later to let him know that he might want to consult legal advice before doing so.