Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar

@asanchez-tojar.bsky.social

Evolutionary ecologist striving for better science. Meta-analyst & Meta-researcher. Principal Investigator @ucoimbra.bsky.social. Past BoD member of SORTEE (@sortee.bsky.social). Receiving & Data Editor @Ecology_Letters. M 2:37, HM 72:49, FTP 4.45W/kg

New preprint! 🎉 I analysed 1660 papers from 4 psychology journals and found materials sharing went from 9% of papers in 2015 to 82% in 2025, and these materials *do* get downloaded — a median of 135 times each. BUT shared code is often hard to run. doi.org/10.31234/osf... Let's walk through it 🧵

Two-panel figure. Panel a is a flow diagram tracking 1,611 empirical psychology articles from publication year (545 in 2015, 552 in 2020, 514 in 2025) to repository-link type: 785 link an OSF project, 85 link another platform, and 741 link no repository. Of those with an OSF link, download counts were retrieved for 670 and not retrieved for 115. Panel b is a line chart of the share of empirical papers linking OSF across 2015, 2020 and 2025. The overall rate, shown as a dashed black line, rises from 9% to 57% to 82%. All four journals rise steeply and end close together: Psychological Science 92%, JESP 89%, JML 83%, Cognition 76%, with Psychological Science highest throughout.Three-panel figure. Panel a: ridgeline plot of downloads per file by material type on a log scale, with the percentage never downloaded labelled for each — archive 16% of 545 files, documents 20% of 2,970, code 12% of 3,471, other 17% of 1,646, data 21% of 10,051, media 35% of 2,120, images 35% of 4,102. Most files cluster between 1 and 10 downloads, with long right tails past 100. Panel b: ridgeline plot of downloads per paper by journal, log scale, with dashed median lines; Psychological Science is highest, then JESP, JML and Cognition. Panel c: stacked bars showing, for documents, data and code separately, the share of papers by download band (0, 1–10, 11–100, more than 100) in 2015, 2020 and 2025. The share exceeding 100 downloads falls sharply over time in all three types, from roughly two-thirds in 2015 to a quarter or less in 2025, as the 1–10 band grows.Four-panel figure. Panel a: statistical languages detected among 333 papers with retrievable code — R 88%, SPSS 12%, Stata 4%, SAS 1%. Panel b: code red flags among those 333 papers — 34% hard-code an absolute path, 40% reference a missing file — above documentation among 672 OSF-linked papers — 21% have a README, 30% are documented by README, description or wiki. Panel c: among 562 Elsevier papers with no repository link, 44% (245) host at least one journal supplementary file but only 14% (77) host data, code or an archive. Panel d: composition of those 448 hosted files — documents 52%, data 21%, media 9%, other 7%, archive 6%, code 3%, images 1%. The code panels are green, the journal-supplement panels blue.Coefficient plot (download predictors)

Dot-and-whisker plot of three standardised predictors of OSF download volume, each with a 95% confidence interval. Repository size (number of files) has the largest effect at about 0.76, citations about 0.38, and altmetric attention about 0.12. All three intervals sit entirely above zero, so each predicts more downloads, with repository size roughly twice the effect of citations and six times that of attention. X-axis: standardised effect, −0.2 to 1.0.

🦎Michael Reichert ( @uofoklahoma.bsky.social Oklahoma State University, USA) 🦎 Anna Olsson ( @i3suporto.bsky.social , University of Porto, Portugal) 🦎 Raquel Vasconcelos ( @marescience.bsky.social , University of Lisbon, Portugal) 🦎 Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar (CNC , University of Coimbra, Portugal)

Congress 2026 - Sociedade Portuguesa de Etologia

Key datesnnKey datesnnAbstract submission: 5 October 2026 Early bird price: 5 October 2026 Late Registration: 6 October to 2 December 2026 Conference: 9 -

etologia.pt

What happens after a PCI recommendation? PCI gives you a peer-reviewed research output but a PCI recommendation does not commit you to a specific journal, you remain free to choose your publication strategy! 👉 Discover your options after a PCI recommendation: peercommunityin.org/submit-a-pre...

Submit a preprint to PCI - Peer Community In

Once an article has been recommended by a PCI, the authors can opt to leave it on a preprint server, to publish it in PCI Journal, to submit it to a PCI-friendly journal or to any other journal

peercommunityin.org

Beca echada, ¡ahora a cruzar los dedos! Si la dan, en unos meses me iré a Coímbra bajo la supervisión de @asanchez-tojar.bsky.social para trabajar en este comportamiento.

El Pulgar del Panda (Jorge Garrido-Bautista)@pulgar-panda.bsky.social · 2w ago

En un par de días solicito una beca de estancia para irme en unos meses a @ucoimbra.bsky.social. Será para ahondar, a nivel teórico y conceptual, en por qué ciertas especies de aves incorporan a los nidos flores y plantas frescas y aromáticas. Aunque no lo creáis, su función está lejos de saberse...

SORTEE recently celebrated five years of its founding! 🪩 Learn more: sortee.org/blog/2026/08... We’d like to thank our incredible community of volunteers for their enthusiasm, energy and commitment towards making ecology & evolutionary biology research more open, reliable and transparent ✨

BildBildBild

Very proud of my PhD student @cas-goos.bsky.social, whose very hard work on measurement (reporting) quality in psychology has now been published in PLoS One! A finding that stuck with me is that reliability is much more often reported if the recalculated reliability was nice and high 👀

Cas Goos@cas-goos.bsky.social · 3w ago

I am proud to announce that my article "Measurement reliability, construct validity, and transparent reporting in original and replication psychological research" has just been published in PLoS One. You can find the published article here: journals.plos.org/plosone/arti...

🧵 New DP from I4R co-director Lester Lusher, with Sonia Ale, Md Shafiqui Islam, Huda Osman & Jacob Stenstrom (Pitt): "When Samples Shape Significance." What happens when you re-estimate published results using fresh draws of the same data? Some evidence from Google Trends!

Bild

🚨Update: Our analysis of global APC expenditure has now been expanded to cover more publishers (7 -> 14) and more years (2019-2025). We estimate $15B in APCs paid over seven years, $3.7B in 2025 alone. Elsevier crosses the $1B threshold by itself in 2025. arxiv.org/abs/2608.16322 #ScholComm

Line chart showing 5 biggest publishers from 2019-2025
Eric Schares@eschares.bsky.social · 2y ago

🚨 Preprint! We combine our recent open dataset of #APC prices with the article counts per journal-year from #OpenAlex to estimate how much the academic community has paid in APCs over the last 5 years. A. $8.349 billion ($8.968 B in 2023 USD) $2.5B in 2023 alone. arxiv.org/abs/2407.16551 #metasci

Keep thinking about this... in simple terms, this could be approx. rephrased as: the average value of pre-publication peer review is 1000x that of not having pre-publication peer review. Is anyone out there considering pre-publication peer review 1000x more valuable than no peer review?

Richard Sever@richardsever.bsky.social · 4w ago

$3.7 billion spent on APCs in 2025. That's ~1000X more than it costs to run bioRxiv/medRxiv. Worth thinking about as we consider how to fund infrastructure... arxiv.org/pdf/2608.16322

2026 SORTEE Conference Plenary speakers announced — Dr Lauren Cadwallader (PLOS) & Dr Tatsuya Amano (UQ)! Program & registration now open. New this year: microgrants for conference barriers, apply by Sept 6. Details available here: sortee.org/upcoming/ See you in October!

Bild