12/19 - What's Going on Wednesday!

Broken submit

 

Title: Dating and Mating Study 3-Year Follow-up(~ 20 minutes) | PANDA
Requester: Carrie Bredow [A1EOM88NY5QFWR]
TurkerView: [ N/A ]
Description: This study is an invited follow-up to the study on relationship attitudes and experiences you completed approximately 3 years ago. The study is expected to take about 20-25 minutes to complete and includes both a categorization and survey component.
Duration: 90 Min
Available: 1
Reward: $12.00
Qualifications:

• Inc: [19-121008] Exists
• Location In US

[3U1ZIKCYY7QC2LI809W2Z84BYCM5TB]​

 

Mostly it is an academics ecosystem. You need to know the field or your research interests are within the journal subjects. Being a referee sucks if you want to do a decent job. No professors want to be a referee, and they only evaluate the top articles that are decent enough to look at deeply. But if you are an assistant professor, you cannot say I do not want to be a referee. You are going to send your papers to those journals so therefore you need to work for them for FREE. Also, here we come; PhD students. I submitted bunch of papers to the journals, and mostly got rejected and they told me to submit them to other journals and asking whether I want to be a referee. You have to say yes as a PhD student. I reviewed just one paper in 2 years though.

Trust. You cannot check everything. If they say they gathered the data through the following way, you just trust their process. You may ask for the data though. If you cheat/lie in a way in your paper, that is the end of your career. "We trusted you, you failed us."
For example, no one reads the proofs at the appendix if they are not interesting proofs or they show a nice new approach. Before submitting a journal there are many people who checked those proofs (Research Assistants, PhD students), so we trust them, they have to be correct before submitting the paper.

You need to be good to be challenged. I am not, so I have limited info about this. The whole process is just a bunch of people reading their colleague's work. So, they are human; they can be merciful, envious, angry, harsh, etc. Human evaluates human.

If you do not have an academic affiliation, it is really hard to (even) submit a paper. Let's say you submit a paper, no one will take you seriously without any affiliation, since you are just a guy in front of a computer. If you have a work/paper to submit, better contact an academician first in the related field. Ask them nicely what they think about your work,

Editors info are everywhere. The reputation of the journal is based on the editors. Most of them are old professors though. They are just professors, you can contact them about the journal. But think them as Jeff Bezos. You do not contact him if you get a rejection from a requester. Editors are the head of the journal. They are there because of their name (except some hardworking editors).

 

Wow! a follow up from 3 years!! I was a completely different person 3 years ago.

 

THE BUNKER IS COMPROMISED

 

Trying to do a HIT with a longass timer and get this from the survey URL

404. We cant find that bro.

 

do they assume your gender?

 

What a sewer. What field are you in? I wonder if you are not good, it sounds awfully political.

 

@ThisPoorGuy

THE LINK IS BROKEN

 

I have published a few things in Physics, but it was always either requested, on behalf of my collaboration, and/or related to a talk I gave or a poster session. I can't speak to the social sciences, but this seems to be where most people get their start. I was in high energy physics where we have huge experimental groups so most of my experience is hey submit your stuff here or submit an application for this and it was almost always accepted with little fuss. My friends in material sciences seemed to have a lot harder time and would need to track down places to publish things.

I think an academic institution would certainly help, but it isn't a requirement. There are a number of journals that are just there to publish about anything. These aren't good journals, but it can be a start. If you become known in whatever field you are publishing in it makes it easier to publish more. What you're looking for is for people to cite your work. There are places that tally this and it looks good for you. A good step for you might be to try to co-auther papers with someone established with a university or who is already being published. This would establish you somewhat. Different journals have different requirements. There might also be something like arXive.org for this sort of stuff, but I don't know. If you're work is solid then arXive will put it up and it's free, unlike journals.

I'm not sure about the editor's, but I've been contacted once or twice about my work. I was happy to answer questions and can't imagine anyone who wouldn't be. I've also contacted the authors of papers before and mostly gotten good responses. Sometime you don't hear back, but I wouldn't feel bad about sending off an email.

Not sure how helpful that is, but that's what I know from my time in academia.

 

Just finished another transcription for $30 (my second one). Also got a response back from the requester's assistant who said she looked at my first submission and it was "perfect" which I know it wasn't but that lets me know they're being cool about what they receive and as long as it's fairly close they're good (If you haven't done these they're not verbatim transcriptions, you actually leave some stuff out).

Lets hope she likes my second one.

If I catch another one tomorrow I might have to pass. Two nights in a row of this has me fried!

 

Oh sorry what I meant in my email is that it fit perfectly into my reject pile.

 

I really hope GSB wasn't kidding about that $20 gift card.

 

I didn't see anything saying that it wasn't real. IRB can always hold them accountable if they were.

 

Title: A Study about Opinions and Attitudes(~ 8 minutes) | PANDA Requester: Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab [A3OSXTUM1QEXNY] (Req TV): $13.96/hr (TO): [Pay: 3.27] [Fair: 4.40] [Comm: 3.44] [Fast: 4.13] Description: $0.80 for 8 minutes! Time: 24 minutes(s) HITs Available: 33 Reward: $0.80 Qualifications: TP Panel: -31667692 N GreaterThanOrEqualTo 100; Total approved HITs GreaterThanOrEqualTo 1000; HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 95; Location In US;

Everyone can get a really nice bonus here. Definitely do this one and panda it if unavailable.

 

TP Panel: -31667692 N GreaterThanOrEqualTo 100

 

This HIT requires Qualifications
This Requester has specified Qualifications for this HIT. At this time, you do not meet those Qualifications.

I don't have their magic qual either rip

 

Thanks. I don't actually want to publish anything (sounds miserable) --- just curious about the process since it is more likely than not material I'm taking care of is going to be used for it more & more

 

Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab [A3OSXTUM1QEXNY] A Study about Opinions and Attitudes(~ 8 minutes) - $0.80 $20.00 bonus | PANDA

Generous

Unrated

Unrated

$280.45 / hour
00:04:27 / completion time

Pros:
welp HOTD if it pays out
bonus.

Cons:
bonus is a "holiday e-gift card" but not specified what exactly the "holiday e-gift card" is - it implies amazon though.

Qualifications: TP Panel: -31667692 N >= 100; Total approved HITs >= 1000; HIT approval rate (%) >= 95; Location In US;

To read Stanford GSB Behavioral Lab's full profile check out TurkerView!​