Associate Professor of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology at OHSU, School of Medicine
Publishing in its current form does not serve the scientific community or the public well enough. Scientists have an ever increasing work load and following the most relevant science becomes harder and harder. Taxpayers have a right to access publicly funded research results. I am excited to be part of an initiative to improve how we disseminate scientific information, and I believe the discovery stack pilot will be a milestone in this process. I am passionate about making science more open, inclusive and diverse. I recently volunteered as an ad hoc editor for a postdoc who wanted to publish their science on a public server but acquire reviews nevertheless. My lab is part of several internship programs that are aimed at increasing diversity in science, and I encourage my trainees to join initiatives and mentoring activities themselves. I attend training such as the CIMER training for culturally aware mentoring on a regular basis.
PROFESSOR of Immunology, Virology, and Microbiology at Rockefeller University INVESTIGATOR at Howard Hughes Medical Institute
I am an advocate for DEI, mentorship, sustainability. I am participating in the DS/DC campaign to transform the peer-review system to become more inclusive, efficient, and fair. I am cautious about reinforcing the current problems within academic publishing with any new endeavor.
Associate Professor at University of Minnesota, Medical School Faculty, MS and PhD Programs in Molecular Pharmacology and Therapeutics (MPaT) Faculty, PhD Program in Microbiology, Immunology and Cancer Biology (MICaB) Faculty, PhD Program in Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Biophysics (BMBB)
I've been a faculty advisor to Empowering Women in Science and the Pharmacology Graduate Student Organization at my university. Science communication and collaborative science are also focal points of my classroom teaching and laboratory. Mentoring is one of the great joys of my faculty position, and I love sharing the experience of doing science with my team. I like the idea of uncoupling assessments of manuscript rigor and impact, which could ultimately help readers to build priority lists and authors to share high-quality but field-specific work. I like the assessment-based approach and orthogonal platform for workshopping ideas, which democratically tests the process without undermining journal PR or workflow. Changing the system risks betraying authors' and readers' trust in existing platforms, which this pilot will avoid. Requesting new service tasks of our already-maxed-out community is also a big ask. Experimental programs should be mindful of this and compensate or streamline accordingly.
Assistant Professor of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology at OHSU, School of Medicine
I believe in: • Creating an inclusive, welcoming research environment for historically excluded voices and minds. • Innovative ways to use less and confront climate change. • Connecting our academic community to the needs and also expertise of our local communities. I am excited that this effort is optimizing for scientific communication that prioritizes using our collective expertise to improve our science and push our understanding forward. And we get to do the experiment to test if this model is going to better achieve our goals of making these exciting new discoveries accessible by combining open access with accountable peer review. I am most concerned about Sustainability. How can we get the granting agencies, tenure panels and prestige award groups to recognize a new type of scientific quality shorthand metric?
Professor at the University of Arizona, College of Medicine Immunobiology, BIO5 Institute, Genetics-GIDP
We - The Scientific Community - need object metrics to determine if there are changes that can be made that would be viewed as improvements by the community at large. In taking part in this pilot, We are a community of experimentalists. We generate, evaluate, and consume the content of publishing. It seems natural that we should reflect upon the process, determine if it is meeting the needs of our community, identify areas in which we think it could benefit from improvement, and test if there are ways to make improvements upon the current system. I get excited about experiments and data. I look forward to the results of this experiment and what they will teach us.
Professor of Pathobiology at UCSF
I am an advocate for Access and inclusion, Engagement with the non-academic world (SciComms), and the thought of a faster and more helpful review process. What excites me about the DS/DC endeavor is the thought of continuous assessment of manuscripts with inline comments from the community. And I am most concerned about our efforts being misplaced, on the community wasting time on things that will go nowhere.
T. Grier Miller Professor of Medicine at Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Associate Director, Center for Molecular Studies in Digestive and Liver Diseases , University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine Co-Director, Gnotobiotics Core Facility , University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine
I am an advocate for science communication. It’s something I am continuing to work on for myself and I greatly admire those who are good at it. The DSP is an exciting experiment to me and an opportunity to learn a lot about our behavior and motivations during peer review. I am looking forward to seeing how people articulate their comments and critiques in this new platform. I would like to avoid creating a publishing landscape that is only favorable to the “big shots”. We need to make sure that any changes to the existing system will help promote the careers of trainees, early stage investigators, and individuals from an underrepresented background.
Professor of Immunology, University of Washington
I am excited about setting fair and equitable standards in the review process and scientists reclaiming control of science publishing from for-profit driven  corporate entities. Adoption of this platform must be embraced by a broader scientific community for sustainability. I believe in interdisciplinary approaches to solving scientific problems, promoting equity in science, and engaging the community in science dissemination.
Associate Professor of Immunobiology at Yale School of Medicine
Science has traditionally had a lot of gate keeping by senior academic faculty, so bringing transparency to science is important. But at the same time there must be some curation to help scientists place data in context. There is currently a fire hose of new publications and it is hard to filter through this. I’m excited about a new way of sharing information about important findings in our field. Additionally, Mentorship for junior scientists is critical, especially one where we let people know that career success is achievable. Success is not a finite resource, everyone can be successful.