Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
43 changes: 31 additions & 12 deletions publishing.qmd
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -22,18 +22,19 @@ authors should keep in mind the historical context of the original
publication. For example, sharing data was much more difficult in the
1990s and not required in many areas until recently.

The journals that published the original studies are often also chosen
by authors for publication in accordance with the *pottery-barn-rule*
[@Srivastava2012]. However, in our experience, many journals reject
replications due to their lack of novelty. We list several options for
writing and publishing the report in @tbl-reporting-options. These are
non-exclusive, that is, researchers can choose multiple of them. An
overview of active journals that exclusively publish replications is in
@tbl-rep-journals. Note that the Journal of Reproducibility in
Neuroscience (<https://jrn.trialanderror.org>) has been discontinued and
AIS Transactions on Replication Research
(<https://aisel.aisnet.org/trr/>) has been moved into a journal that is
not specialized on repetitions.
Communicating a replication and formally publishing it in a
peer-reviewed journal are distinct, complementary activities, and they
are not mutually exclusive. Researchers can make their findings visible,
linkable, and in some cases citable without a traditional journal, they can pursue journal
publication, or they can do both. @tbl-reporting-options lists the main
options, and researchers can choose one, several, or all of them. The
first two options, the FORRT Replication Database and PubPeer, make a
replication findable without writing a full manuscript. A manuscript,
the traditional form of a research article, can in turn be released as a
preprint, which makes it openly available and citable before peer
review, and the same manuscript can also be submitted to a journal.
Posting a preprint and submitting to a journal are therefore
complementary rather than competing choices.

| Type | Description |
|----|----|
Expand All @@ -46,6 +47,24 @@ not specialized on repetitions.
: Reporting and communicating reproductions and replications.
{#tbl-reporting-options}

For researchers who pursue traditional journal publication, the journals
that published the original studies are a natural target, in accordance
with the *pottery-barn rule* [@Srivastava2012], under which a journal
that published an original finding should consider publishing
methodologically sound replications of findings it originally published.
In our experience, however, many journals reject replications due to
their lack of novelty, and some remain reluctant to consider
replications. Partly in response, journals dedicated to replications have
emerged, and @tbl-rep-journals lists active examples. Note that the
Journal of Reproducibility in Neuroscience
(<https://jrn.trialanderror.org>) has been discontinued and AIS
Transactions on Replication Research (<https://aisel.aisnet.org/trr/>)
has been moved into a journal that is not specialized on repetitions.
Researchers can also submit a preprint to a PCI community (see
<https://peercommunityin.org/current-pcis>), a preprint peer-review
service, and several journals are PCI-friendly, meaning they may
consider or publish articles recommended by the respective PCI.

Many institutions and libraries recommend adding a CC-BY disclaimer on
journal submissions that give the researchers the right to use the
accepted manuscript as they like or choosing Diamond Open Access
Expand Down