Category: pubpeer selections

Since it launched in 2012, PubPeer has grown to become a standard part of the scientific lexicon, and its numerous post-publication discussions have led to more editorial notices than we can count. But it’s also faced its share of critics, including a scientist who took the site to court to unmask commenters he alleged had cost him a job offer. The site won that case on appeal, but is today launching new features that will make it impossible for the site to reveal users’ identities, as well as easier to read and format comments. We spoke with PubPeer co-founder Brandon Stell about what to expect from the new site.

Retraction Watch: What changes have you introduced to the site?

Continue reading Meet PubPeer 2.0: New version of post-publication peer review site launches today

The creators of PubPeer dropped their own anonymity today, as part of an announcement about a new chapter in the life of the post-publication peer review site.

By now, Retraction Watch readers will be familiar with PubPeer.com. Founded in 2012, the commenting site has allowed for robust discussions of scientific papers — which in turn have led to corrections and retractions. (We regularly feature discussions there in our PubPeer Selections feature.) The site has many supporters — including us — but also some critics, one of whom has filed suit against its commenters, arguing anonymous comments cost him a job opportunity. (Late last week, PubPeer learned that a judge had granted them the right to appeal the most recent decision in that case.)

Like most of the commenters on the site, whose careers could be threatened if they were exposed as critics, the founders of the site have until now been anonymous.

Today, however, founders Brandon Stell, George Smith, and Richard Smith unmasked themselves. They are joined on a board of directors by Boris Barbour and Gabor Brasnjo. Stell and Barbour are practicing scientists, while Brasnjo, who trained as a scientist, works as an attorney. Here’s the whole statement, followed by a Q&A with Stell: Continue reading PubPeer founders reveal themselves, create foundation

PubPeer failed to convince a Michigan judge last week that they should be able to keep the identity of one of their commenters confidential. Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Promoting homeopathy; comments lead to Cell and JBC corrections

PubPeer won a near-complete victory in a court case last week. Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Feedback within a day; “worst examples of data;” endocrinology papers questioned

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Odd citations, “practice makes perfect,” a Nature update

PubPeer continues to make its mark on the scientific literature. Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Good behavior earns praise; questions about HIV vaccine research

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: “Too remarkable to believe;” a super-duplicate publication; what was acceptable in 2002?

This week, PubPeer filed a motion to quash a subpoena demanding that they reveal the names of some of their commenters. Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Spinal injury, theoretical physics, and inherited fear

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: More questions about stem cells, price-shopping access charges