Table of Contents
Morning folks! Just a short one today, but something I had to share with you. I had a lovely holiday in a log cabin this week so my writing has been a bit less. Lots of family time and activities, some reading, cooking tasty food and an all-round relaxing week. I’ll be back at work when you read this. Hope you are managing to get some holiday time as well. Annette
I had an idea on my walk this morning, about starting a peer-reviewed journal. It would be called something along the lines of ‘The Journal of Personal Experimentation’, or ‘Citizen Experiments Journal’... or something along those lines.
What it lacks in an imaginative title, it makes up for in the concept, don't worry! In essence it’s an opportunity for anyone to take part in the scientific process.
This idea would:
① Encourage detailed, personal or small group experiments written into a clear, understandable style (e.g. AIMRaD) - not necessarily on yourself, but by yourself. The scope can be huge, the only limitation is your imagination.
② Provide an opportunity for you to experience peer-review and collective insight to improve practise.
③ Help you to develop skills in the scientific method by providing resources and courses delivered by research experts
④ Encourage curiosity and insight as a collective of people without the resources of a large research project or team. Citizen science is incredibly valuable but we don’t do it enough.
⑤ Promote the skills and passion of citizen science at any age and any skill level as long as it shows evidence of rigour, thought and an understanding of the limitations of the work.
⑥ Attempt to turn the current academic journal, peer-review model on its head by paying editors and reviewers, and people who submit work. It would be funded by advertising, sponsorship and optional support membership.
⑦ Make science more understandable and relatable by bypassing a lot of academic language, because it’s written by you.
⑧ Modernise the communication methods of peer-reviewed, science through accepting videos, and infographics, whilst improving searchability, context and connection of work. Accept short pieces, as long as they contain the detail needed.
⑨ Support detailed, comparative and methodical reviews of equipment, books, software and educational resources and institutions. Any conflicts of interest are clearly stated.
⑩ Most importantly, it will be based on the scientific method, not opinions (unless in the case of opinion articles). Are you the ‘best’ coach - show me your evidence! Are you an ‘expert’ on writing - show me with data how this is the case? Think one software is better than the other - show me with a structured test why this is the case! Have the secret to grow the best tomatoes - show me the experiment you did to support this!
Peer-review isn’t infallible of course, but I feel this could be a great platform for much better, evidenced personal development, ideas and concepts etc… We can support and cite each other, building a collective knowledge, which is directly applicable to you.
What do you think?
Do you reckon this could fly?
Please let me know in the comments!
Quote of the Week
“The best way to predict the future is to create it.”
- Peter Drucker
What I’m Reading
❌ Didn’t like ‘Linchpin’ by Seth Godin:
Poor writing style, disjointed
Read a summary article and you’ll get more for your time 😂
😊 Enjoying “Your Brain Knows More Than You Think: the new frontiers of neuroplasticity” by Niels Birbaumer:
A curious book to make you think about how we change our mind, whether you agree with the author’s methods or not (why it ‘only’ gets 4⭐ on Amazon)
Well-written
✅ Finished The 80/20 Principle by Richard Koch:
Just read the first few chapters, a bit of a broken record after these
Gave me some interesting thoughts around scientific results interpretation
I can't say how much it means to me for you to subscribe and read this newsletter. Thanks for making it to the bottom. I hope the rest of your day is as wonderful as you for reading this far 😁
Annette
Comments