Read on Twitter
Me: Ugh, why do we have to hear all the research about why they're switching to Dual Anonymous Peer Review again? We all know why.
*reads questions being submitted*
Me: Ohhhhhh okay go ahead then.
*reads questions being submitted*
Me: Ohhhhhh okay go ahead then.
I think some of the deep discomfort we are seeing around DAPR is that *so much* of science culture has historically been centered on building science 'cachet'.
Publication records, instrument/lab access, proprietary data and codes, citation metrics - all typical measures of how 'good' a scientist is.
So, now that we're asking scientists to submit proposals stripped of being able to lean into all this scaffolding they've constructed, it's a big change in culture. I can see why people would resist.
BUT I also see why it's so important to try it.
BUT I also see why it's so important to try it.
And honestly, people seem VERY concerned with someone unqualified writing an excellent science proposal, which so far has happened 0/500 times.
