Icons for peer-reviewed blogging 29 Oct 200718 Sep 2017 The above are icons to be used when blogging on actual peer-reviewed research (as opposed to popular reports or kookery). I had a marginal involvement in this (I made some passing comments early on) so it is with great pride… no, actually, it’s all down to Dave Munger, who was a champion. I had nothing useful to do with it. Here’s what Dave said: We’re pleased to announce that BPR3‘s Blogging on Peer Reviewed Research icons are now ready to go! Anyone can use these icons to show when they’re making a serious post about peer-reviewed research, rather than just linking to a news article or press release. Within a month, these blog posts will also be aggregated at BPR3.org, so everyone can go to one place to locate the most serious, thoughtful analysis and commentary on the web. I encourage science bloggers to use this wisely, to identify a blog about actual reviewed papers. I guess it also applies to us humanities types too. Administrative General Science Logic and philosophy
Administrative Icon for Blogging Peer Reviewed research 15 Aug 2007 Dear readers, Dave Munger of Cognitive Daily has suggested that we have a universally available icon to indicate that the blogger is blogging about peer reviewed research, and he has created a discussion blog at BPR3. Please go make suggestions and add to the discussion. Muggins here will implement it… Read More
Administrative Off to talk religion and evolution 18 Sep 2008 Okay, so in the AM I am off to drizzly Melbourne, my old home town, to address a conference on the implications of the project of naturalising religion, especially in terms of evolution, to an audience that may, or may not be religious. So if you never hear from me… Read More
Administrative 99 things on the wall meme 19 Nov 2008 From here via here via here, 99 things I have or haven’t done. Read More
I don’t get why your post on Ruse’s entry in SEP was notated as a peer-reviewed item. Am I missing something?
Thanks for your help John. We’ve appreciated your support. And, as you point out, the icon can indeed be used by “humanities types” — it’s something I’ve insisted on from the beginning. It’s about blogging based on *research*, not just science research.
Okay, I was under the impression that this particular piece by Ruse was more of an editorial than a peer-reviewed article. But, I have never been a philosophy student, so it is hard for me to tell the difference.
I know this because I am a coauthor on one of the articles, and my revisions have been subjected to peer review. Maybe Ruse’s contributions aren’t, but as I understand it, the entire publication is.
Of course I trust you on this and I wasn’t questioning you, I was just trying to get some clarification.