Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] arXiv web of trust From: Les Bernstein <lbernstein@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 14:55:26 -0400--------------hBwl0vFOJ6VDW5EILQ9bir4i Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by edgeum3.it.mcgill.ca id 351Ith1q056901 On 5/31/2023 2:15 PM, Matthew Winn wrote: > *** Attention: This is an external email. Use caution responding,=20 > opening attachments or clicking on links. *** > There are statements in this thread that cannot go unchallenged,=20 > because they condone and perpetuate harmful ideas that need to end.=20 > Specifically: > 1) =E2=80=9CIf one is not a sufficiently confident and independent thin= ker=20 > such that one can express ideas, arguments, disagreements, etc. with=20 > anyone in the field, regardless of stature, then that is a weakness=E2=80= =9D > This statement ignores the multiple power structures that affect the=20 > lives and employment of those below the =E2=80=98upper echelon=E2=80=99= in the field.=20 > Expressing an idea involves risk when your position is precarious.=20 > Adapting to and weighing that risk is a key survival strategy, not a=20 > weakness. I have a blind spot for this risk =E2=80=93 not because I=E2=80= =99m so great=20 > at science, but because my culture gives me unearned respect because=20 > of my demographics. For people like me (and, I will note, virtually=20 > everyone on this thread), we live in a culture that insulates us from=20 > any sense that our voice doesn=E2=80=99t belong. I could not disagree more.=C2=A0 The suggestion that, within our field,=20 different cultural backgrounds confer more or less ability to have=20 productive scientific discussions with anyone, regardless of status is,=20 as I see it, just plain nonsense.=C2=A0 Expressing an idea involves risk?= =C2=A0=20 Really, in our field of auditory science?=C2=A0 I can give plenty of=20 counterexamples to such an assertion. > > > 2) =E2=80=9Cthink about how such researchers earned such status.=C2=A0 = It was not=20 > because they had friends, it was not because people liked them.=C2=A0 I= t=20 > was because they established a track-record of contributions that the=20 > field, in general, held in very high regard.=E2=80=9D > This is a self-serving narrative that reflects survivorship bias and=20 > which ignores everything we know about how people act in real life.=20 > Science is done by humans, who have personal interests, biases, and=20 > who live within a culture where status is built on many layers of=20 > privilege. Every decision we make is filtered by these factors, which=20 > allow some people (like me) to accumulate a variety of advantages at=20 > every career stage, simply because of how they look, who their friends=20 > are, and where they grew up. They are more likely to have papers=20 > accepted, to be selected for podium presentations, to have a job=20 > application reviewed, to be interviewed, to be hired, to be selected=20 > as editors and reviewers, to be elected to positions of leadership,=20 > and to be given favorable treatment in the workplace. To be taken=20 > seriously. If we pretend that these advantages are ALL due to the=20 > scientific merit of one=E2=80=99s work, we are characterizing scientist= s as=20 > some species entirely separate from the rest of humanity. Again, theoretical, social drivel.=C2=A0 Lloyd Jeffress, Dave Green, Neal= =20 Viemester, Barbara Bohne, and on and on. > > > 3) =E2=80=9CStature does not count. Everyone should be held to the very= same=20 > standard=E2=80=9D > We all agree that work should not be judged on the basis of who wrote=20 > it. But importantly, the influence of stature doesn=E2=80=99t need to b= e=20 > explicitly suggested in order to actually take place. Similar to the=20 > last point, the idea of equal standards and equal treatment is a=20 > convenient fiction that allows people like me to feel superior because=20 > I can attribute my success to my own hard work and merit, even though=20 > many factors that led to that success were unearned. Again, your theoretical musing.=C2=A0 Not the reality in auditory science= =20 that I have seen. > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D > What does this have to do with preprints? The point is to consider=20 > that others have a different set of constraints, and that our=20 > definitions of merit are tailored to suit those who are already=20 > enjoying a wide variety of privileges. Consider the forces that lead=20 > authors to think that preprints are useful, and also whether you are=20 > facing the same expectations and constraints that they are. Numerous=20 > people have pointed at the apparent generational divide on this issue=20 > - let's figure out why. Graduate admissions and fellowship review=20 > increasingly expect a publication record that far exceeds anything=20 > that would have been expected of the reviewers when they were at that=20 > same career stage. For various reasons, the timeline of publication is=20 > increasingly long. Exacerbating this, it is no longer enough to simply=20 > conduct a good study; one must also curate a data management and=20 > sharing plan that includes open-access data and documented code. One=20 > must learn and conduct the latest statistical techniques that their=20 > advisors never needed to learn, and sift through a much broader set of=20 > literature that includes a lot of garbage. To compete for stable=20 > employment, younger scholars need an internet presence and must learn=20 > to incorporate inclusive language in their writing, even if that were=20 > not part of their training. They need to express how their work=20 > contributes to the reduction of harm in society, despite being advised=20 > by some of the people who are doing the harm. None of this, much of which I find to be mere unjustified assertion, is=20 an argument for shifting the weight of dissemination of work toward=20 non-refereed open access.=C2=A0 By the way, when was it the case that a s= olid=20 knowledge of statistical techniques was unnecessary?=C2=A0 Hey, you don't= =20 have to wire together analog equipment to generate your signals! > > Preprints are not a magical solution that can eliminate the multiple=20 > barriers that I described above. But they have tangible value, and=20 > reflect adaptation to a changing academic landscape, rather than=20 > reflecting some loss of =E2=80=9Cstandards=E2=80=9D that are designed t= o protect those=20 > already at the top, and which were established under an entirely=20 > different system of constraints. > > Preprints help address the needs for 1) visibility and 2) quicker=20 > feedback on your work from a wider variety of scholars who might not=20 > have been invited to review, simply because they were not in the=20 > network of the associate editor. These factors are often yoked=20 > together; the channels that spread awareness of a preprint (like=20 > Twitter) might also be the same channels that generate discussion that=20 > becomes useful feedback. The tendency (or need) to use these=20 > dissemination channels probably reinforces the generational divide on=20 > this thread. I assure you that the comments I've received from people=20 > enthusiastic enough to read a preprint have had meaningful influence=20 > and value. And those comments can come from a wider variety of people=20 > whose opinions have been historically discounted. Experienced=20 > reviewers will always have a place in our scientific discourse, but to=20 > discount the benefit and potential of preprints is to be willfully=20 > detached from our current reality. I never said one should not use pre-prints for whatever benefit they can=20 confer. > > Matt --=20 *Leslie R. Bernstein, Ph.D. **| *Professor Emeritus Depts. of Neuroscience and Surgery (Otolaryngology) | UConn School of=20 Medicine 263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06030-3401 Office: 860.679.4622 | Fax: 860.679.2495 --------------hBwl0vFOJ6VDW5EILQ9bir4i Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------tM40XeELW6JCzCZJg4nqjkqo" --------------tM40XeELW6JCzCZJg4nqjkqo Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by edgeum3.it.mcgill.ca id 351Ith1q056901 <html><head> <meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8"> </head> <body> <div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 5/31/2023 2:15 PM, Matthew Winn wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> =20 <div style=3D"background-color:#D5EAFF; padding:.8em; "> <div style=3D"font-size:12pt; color:#ff0000; text-align: center; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif;"> *** Attention: This is an external email. Use caution responding, opening attachments or clicking on links. ***</div> </div> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr">There are statements in this thread that canno= t go unchallenged, because they condone and perpetuate harmful ideas that need to end. Specifically:<br> 1) =E2=80=9CIf one is not a sufficiently confident and indepe= ndent thinker such that one can express ideas, arguments, disagreements, etc. with anyone in the field, regardless of stature, then that is a weakness=E2=80=9D<br> This statement ignores the multiple power structures that affect the lives and employment of those below the =E2=80=98u= pper echelon=E2=80=99 in the field. Expressing an idea involves ri= sk when your position is precarious. Adapting to and weighing that risk is a key survival strategy, not a weakness. I have a blind spot for this risk =E2=80=93 not because I=E2=80=99m so= great at science, but because my culture gives me unearned respect because of my demographics. For people like me (and, I will note, virtually everyone on this thread), we live in a culture that insulates us from any sense that our voice doesn=E2=80=99t belong.</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> <font size=3D"2" face=3D"Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">I could not disagree more. The suggestion that, within our field, differe= nt cultural backgrounds confer more or less ability to have productive scientific discussions with anyone, regardless of status is, as I see it, just plain nonsense. Expressing an id= ea involves risk?</font><font size=3D"2"><font face=3D"Helvetica, Aria= l, sans-serif"> Really, in our field of auditory science? = ; I can give plenty of counterexamples to such an assertion.</font><br> </font> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr"><font size=3D"2"> </font><br> <br> 2) =E2=80=9Cthink about how such researchers earned such stat= us. It was not because they had friends, it was not because people liked them. It was because they established a track-rec= ord of contributions that the field, in general, held in very high regard.=E2=80=9D<br> This is a self-serving narrative that reflects survivorship bias and which ignores everything we know about how people act in real life. Science is done by humans, who have personal interests, biases, and who live within a culture where status is built on many layers of privilege. Every decision we make is filtered by these factors, which allow some people (like me) to accumulate a variety of advantages at every career stage, simply because of how they look, who their friends are, and where they grew up. They are more likely to have papers accepted, to be selected for podium presentations, to have a job application reviewed, to be interviewed, to be hired, to be selected as editors and reviewers, to be elected to positions of leadership, and to be given favorable treatment in the workplace. To be taken seriously. If we pretend that these advantages are ALL due to the scientific merit of one=E2=80=99s work, we are charact= erizing scientists as some species entirely separate from the rest of humanity.</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <font size=3D"2" face=3D"Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Again, theoretical, social drivel. Lloyd Jeffress, Dave Green, Neal Viemester, Barbara Bohne, and on and on. </font><font size=3D= "2"><br> </font> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr"><font size=3D"2"> </font><br> <br> 3) =E2=80=9CStature does not count. Everyone should be held t= o the very same standard=E2=80=9D<br> We all agree that work should not be judged on the basis of who wrote it. But importantly, the influence of stature doesn=E2=80=99t need to be explicitly suggested in order to a= ctually take place. Similar to the last point, the idea of equal standards and equal treatment is a convenient fiction that allows people like me to feel superior because I can attribute my success to my own hard work and merit, even though many factors that led to that success were unearned.<b= r> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <font size=3D"2" face=3D"Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Again, your theoretical musing. Not the reality in auditory science that = I have seen.</font><br> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <br> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D <br> What does this have to do with preprints? The point is to consider that others have a different set of constraints, and that our definitions of merit are tailored to suit those who are already enjoying a wide variety of privileges. Consider the forces that lead authors to think that preprints are useful, and also whether you are facing the same expectations and constraints that they are. Numerous people have pointed at the apparent generational divide on this issue - let's figure out why. Graduate admissions and fellowship review increasingly expect a publication record that far exceeds anything that would have been expected of the reviewers when they were at that same career stage. For various reasons, the timeline of publication is increasingly long. Exacerbating this, it is no longer enough to simply conduct a good study; one must also curate a data management and sharing plan that includes open-access data and documented code. One must learn and conduct the latest statistical techniques that their advisors never needed to learn, and sift through a much broader set of literature that includes a lot of garbage. To compete for stable employment, younger scholars need an internet presence and must learn to incorporate inclusive language in their writing, even if that were not part of their training. They need to express how their work contributes to the reduction of harm in society, despite being advised by some of the people who are doing the harm.</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> <font size=3D"2" face=3D"Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">None of this, much of which I find to be mere unjustified assertion, is an argument for shifting the weight of dissemination of work toward non-refereed open access. By the way, when was it the case th= at a solid knowledge of statistical techniques was unnecessary? He= y, you don't have to wire together analog equipment to generate your signals!</font><br> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr"><br> Preprints are not a magical solution that can eliminate the multiple barriers that I described above. But they have tangible value, and reflect adaptation to a changing academic landscape, rather than reflecting some loss of =E2=80=9Cstandards=E2=80=9D that are designed to protect thos= e already at the top, and which were established under an entirely different system of constraints.</div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <br> Preprints help address the needs for 1) visibility and 2) quicker feedback on your work from a wider variety of scholars who might not have been invited to review, simply because they were not in the network of the associate editor. These factors are often yoked together; the channels that spread awareness of a preprint (like Twitter) might also be the same channels that generate discussion that becomes useful feedback. The tendency (or need) to use these dissemination channels probably reinforces the generational divide on this thread. I assure you that the comments I've received from people enthusiastic enough to read a preprint have had meaningful influence and value. And those comments can come from a wider variety of people whose opinions have been historically discounted. Experienced reviewers will always have a place in our scientific discourse, but to discount the benefit and potential of preprints is to be willfully detached from our current reality.<br> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <font size=3D"2" face=3D"Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><br> I never said one should not use pre-prints for whatever benefit they can confer.</font><br> <blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:CANiEZgsasbZKxzLbD2Zcj_4fAiVg6S= e5Lock5DNAaiBHG04w5w@xxxxxxxx"> <div> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <br> Matt<br> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> <br> <div class=3D"moz-signature">-- <br> =20 <title></title> <div class=3D"moz-signature"> <div class=3D"moz-signature"><b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;f= ont-family:"Arial",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#002048"">Leslie R. Bernstein, Ph.D. </span>= </b><b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans= -serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858"">| </span></b><span style=3D"font-s= ize:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;mso-fareast-font-fami= ly:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858"">Professor Emeritus</span><= span style=3D"mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p>= </o:p></span><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial"= ;,sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858""></span><br> <div class=3D"moz-signature"> <div class=3D"moz-signature"> <div class=3D"moz-signature"><span style=3D"font-size:10.0p= t;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858""></span> <div class=3D"moz-signature"><span style=3D"font-size:10.= 0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858""> Depts. of Neuroscience and Surgery (Otolaryngology) | UConn School of Medicine </span><br> <span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial= ",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858""></span><span style=3D"font-s= ize:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858"">263 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, CT 06030-3401</span><br> <span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial= ",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858""></span><span style=3D"font-s= ize:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman \;color\:\#585858"">Office: 860.679.4622 | Fax: 860.679.2495<br> <br> <img moz-do-not-send=3D"false" src=3D"cid:part1.80xVC= ANR.EIZRu4xC@xxxxxxxx" alt=3D"" width=3D"125" height=3D"48"><br> </span> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </body> </html> --------------tM40XeELW6JCzCZJg4nqjkqo Content-Type: image/png; name="image001.png" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.png" Content-ID: <part1.80xVCANR.EIZRu4xC@xxxxxxxx> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAH0AAAAwCAMAAAALmIWlAAAAGXRFWHRTb2Z0d2FyZQBBZG9iZSBJ bWFnZVJlYWR5ccllPAAAADNQTFRFKzVYHCZM4eLn8PHzpKi30dTbaG+IlZqrs7fDWWB8O0Nkd32U wsXPSlJwhoufDRhA////A68jmAAAABF0Uk5T/////////////////////wAlrZliAAACYklEQVR4 2uzY22KDIAwAUC7e6gjw/187gUC4OetaupflaTXKWSuBKNMuJptC+QMCP20auPHBQCubBWU46K24 uB7NfZ58ZqaMP8D8AEBHtT/goXnB8WPwBf8r1WYUXWxUOZobHcJXIMcfONclmE4s0lrRzYBIOjvT jX5WV6YbP2ZQJ6TWjfiAbuYzHW7p+xpuolQrP83sjQ5nupnu6LqaJ92MbnSznulcfkBHpNXNY6y+ c0JKnWX1eFeflQt5qcNESKnrQMrf6LSAXeiWkEoXdOU4nZBKxzPnoTohtW5ZZyK8W09Io6tYjyP1 iDS6XbAeh815S0irS6zHUfXuB0Ok1S3W41AdEWh1/Nb7UD1bWytd0LY4ThdnerYbBJ1taT5XBmy4 J8mNnWagp5fbba6HeiTdneK6vNgoFj0EhyO4eSZT6AlpdNXoNzqYi94GbIU0eqhHp3d5drRf4heZ Uo9Iq8vYptup6VB37H6m/W6m0hFpdaxH3/yK9cHpVq5Zy59n2GMV/QxPGdV9NElPE9njyOozsfWW Kq6j7bLuw97KPBnM/mX86//6n+tH/yLKP7AUXcyd80Lx53WnspB47ty5qKND1gLockfIFzHR7srp Q7X0+6GgHPNFXedPyaN1CPFli71z+ZBeTxbcI2RXxwOQj/lW/Ui610Z6gA4a32WRrssXYbO76V/Z y6FLnZVj/qCnqGcdZE1DeFKcntWrMV/RZXCh7B/fpF/+8tQQx6J74y9/Oeuyrm75+Jyf8oKWH9CL 1SYNJtJ91HTOAD2fdjPN9UcsumwmDNYXqvPtOLa9pH8LMACnoV0siZAyOAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== --------------tM40XeELW6JCzCZJg4nqjkqo-- --------------hBwl0vFOJ6VDW5EILQ9bir4i--