Dr. Judith Curry tips me to this interesting blog post by Daniel Lakens, an experimental psychologist at the Human-Technology Interaction group at Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands.
A blog on statistics, methods, and open science. Understanding 20% of statistics will improve 80% of your inferences.
The Dutch toilet cleaner ‘WC-EEND’ (literally: ‘Toilet Duck’) aired a famous commercial in 1989 that had the slogan ‘We from WC-EEND advise… WC-EEND’. It is now a common saying in The Netherlands whenever someone gives an opinion that is clearly aligned with their self-interest. In this blog, I will examine the hypothesis that blogs are, on average, of higher quality than journal articles. Below, I present 5 arguments in favor of this hypothesis.
- Blogs have Open Data, Code, and Materials [when technical articles are published, yes, whenever possible]
- Blogs have Open Peer Review [oh, don’t you know it, except hardly anyone reads RealClimate anymore]
- Blogs have no Eminence Filter [just look at the variety of articles on Climate etc, Climate Audit, and WUWT]
- Blogs have Better Error Correction [absolutely, mistakes are usually caught within minutes]
- Blogs are Open Access (and might be read more). [no paywalls=broad distribution]
Read his entire article for the thinking behind the reasons, my comments are [in brackets] above. Item 5 is particularly important. It has been said to me by a few people that WUWT has changed the world. I think it has, but I view it as a collective effort with other climate blogs. If climate blogs didn’t exist, there would be no exposure of Climategate, no exposure of the [IPCC’s] horrid messes in AR4 and AR5, among other issues.
There may be other benefits, I’m sure readers can add some points not covered above.