Please join us in welcoming our new committee members:
Ze Freeman @zefreeman.bsky.social
Ze is finishing his PhD at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London. In 2024, he started the university’s ReproducibiliTea club, which he co-organises. He has collaborated on open research projects at King’s, in the UKRN, and with other groups to improve transparency and credibility in research.
Ezgi Hatip Ünlü (LinkedIn)
Ezgi is a first-year PhD candidate in Clinical Epidemiology in Cardiology at Erasmus MC. She has a strong interdisciplinary background in Medicine, Anesthesiology, and Biostatistics. She began a Master’s program in Clinical Epidemiology at Erasmus MC in 2023 and now continues directly as a PhD candidate. In her PhD project, she focuses on prognostic biomarkers in heart failure, with a particular interest in improving reproducibility in clinical research.
Quentin Le Cornu @quentinlc.bsky.social / (LinkedIn)
Quentin Le Cornu is a part-time PhD student working on a research project focused on developing evidence-based data management and sharing plans for randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses in clinical research. This project is a collaboration between University College Dublin (UCD), the University of Rennes (France), and the University of Ottawa (Canada). Since 2025, Quentin has co-organised the ReproducibiliTea journal club at UCD. He is also a research statistician and trainer at UCD CSTAR (Centre for Support and Training in Analysis and Research). Previously, he held positions at Inserm U1153 and the Clinical Investigation Center (CIC 1414) in France. His main research interests include open science and clinical trial methodology.
Marjan Monshi
Marjan is a PhD candidate in Physics at Kaunas University of Technology (KTU), in collaboration with the European PCAM network at Southern Denmark University. She is one of the core members of the Open Science community at KTU and registered the first university’s ReproducibiliTea journal club specifically for the engineering faculty. Inspired by the shift towards democratic and reproducible research, she values trust and transparency and is committed to fostering a collaborative culture of knowledge sharing among early-career researchers.
And, our new committee chair:
Lianne Wolsink (LinkedIn)
Lianne is currently finishing her PhD at the Department of Cognitive Psychology at Ruhr University Bochum (Germany). She is originally from the Netherlands, where she studied Psychology and Neuroscience in Nijmegen and Maastricht. Over the past years, she has developed a strong interest in issues surrounding reproducibility and transparency. Lianne started and co-organised the ReproducibiliTea in Bochum. She believes that ReproducibiliTea journal clubs are ideal places for early career researchers to learn, discuss, reflect, and connect, not only locally, but also with the global community and other reform initiatives.
And, give a warm ‘welcome back’ to our returning members:
Abigail Licata @licataae.bsky.social / (LinkedIn)
Abigail is a PhD student in Neuroscience at the University of Geneva (Switzerland) and is a part of the Swiss Reproducibility Network. She has co-organized the ReproducibiliTea journal clubs since 2023 and has been involved with reproducibility-focused events including BrainHack and workshops on reproducible analysis with R Quarto. Prior to her PhD, she worked in clinics in the US and Germany, assisting professionals of different backgrounds with neuroimaging analysis in various patient populations. Beyond her passion for reproducible neuroimaging, she also helps connect women in neuroscience across the globe as a member and event co-organizer for the Women in Neuroscience Repository. She believes in science as a collaborative effort for the benefit of humanity and hopes to spread FAIR neuroimaging methods far and wide!
Anastasiia Marmyleva @marmyleva_ana / @marmyleva-ana.bsky.social / (LinkedIn)
Anastasiia is an avid mitochondria enthusiast, which drove her to pursue a Doctoral degree at the University of Helsinki, Finland. She is also a co-organiser of a ReproducibiliTea UniHelsinki club - a safe space for researchers to address the issues of reproducibility in science and educate each other on good practices. Anastasiia is also passionate about science communication and is not afraid to use these tools to fight against miscommunication in research.
Michael Muhoozi (LinkedIn)
Michael Muhoozi is a PhD student in Health Care Policy & Research at Virginia Commonwealth University and a researcher with the Center for Health and Population Research at Makerere University in Uganda. His work spans health services research, epidemiology, and economic evaluation, with a particular focus on strengthening evidence‑informed decision‑making in health policy. Motivated by the need for transparent and trustworthy research, Michael founded and co‑organizes Makerere University’s first ReproducibiliTea journal club, creating a collaborative space for early‑career researchers to engage with open science principles. He is also part of the African Reproducibility Network (AREN), where he contributes to capacity‑building efforts that promote rigorous, reproducible, and accessible research practices. His research interests include reproducible workflows, open science, and equitable policy evaluation, particularly within underrepresented and resource‑constrained settings. Michael is committed to fostering a culture of methodological integrity and shared learning, ensuring that robust evidence can genuinely inform public health action.
Hemani Sharma (LinkedIn)
Hemani is a dedicated professional in the field of Bioinformatics. She is currently pursuing Ph.D. in Bioinformatics from Jaipur National University. She is adept at crafting scientific papers for academic journals and writes the BIOCLUES newsletter, organizes the Journal Club talks, and coordinates conferences and workshops to ensure productive outcomes, fostering collaborative scientific discussions. Hemani also worked as a Junior Research Fellow at the Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley (2011-2013) under the guidance of Dr. Ravish Chatrath and Dr. Rekha Malik. Noteworthy research projects include hierarchical clustering of Indian wheat varieties, evaluation of agro-morphological characters for genetic diversity, and establishing a core set of Indian wheat.
We have a lot of exciting projects and we are always looking for ideas. If you want to get involved, have a cool idea you think we could tackle, or have comments for us, please get in touch.
]]>Currently, the ReproducibiliTea steering committee consists of 7 members: Helena Gellersen (co-chair), Abigail Licata, Paulina Manduch (co-chair), Anastasiia Marmyleva, Michael Muhoozi, Hemani Sharma, and Lianne Wolsink.
We are supported by the ReproducibiliTea advisory board (Sophia Crüwell, Matt Jaquiery, William Ngiam, Amy Orben, Sam Parsons, Jade Pickering, Hazel Aileen van der Walle, Jan Vornhagen) as well as other team members and contributors.
We run the following projects and organisational functions:
Website and OSF folder - Team: Paulina Manduch, Lianne Wolsink, Abigail Licata, Matt Jaquiery, Michael Muhoozi, Helena Gellersen
We develop, add and update content on our website and OSF folder, for example:
Reading lists - Team: Lianne Wolsink (lead), Hazel Aileen van der Walle, Hemani Sharma, Helena Gellersen
There are two new reading lists available via our app and OSF folder:
We are also working on new reading lists (e.g., researcher’s degrees of freedom, post-publication reviewing, bioinformatics). We are also very open to contributions. If you are interested in creating a new reading list, please contact us via email. See our guide on how to create a ReproducibiliTea reading list.
In June 2025, we were awarded a SIPS Commendation for our reading lists!
Podcast - Team: Anastasiia Marmyleva (lead), Helena Gellersen, William Ngiam, Sarah Sauvé, Queen Saikia
The podcast team released 4 new podcast episodes:
In June 2025, we were also awarded a SIPS Commendation for our podcast!
External communications and social media - Team: Abigail Licata, Paulina Manduch
We have been working to not only keep the community updated with new and interesting papers and projects, but we have also started a series of social media posts which highlight new journal clubs around the world: Liverpool, UK; Wrocław, Poland; OpenScienceLab UC3M, Spain; OldenburgPsych, Germany; Copenhagen, Denmark; Kaunas, Lithuania; Lisbon, Portugal; Buenos Aires, Argentina; QueriosiTea, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India; The University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Follow us on social media for more updates:
Bluesky | Linkedin | Mastodon | X.
Events - Team: Abigail Licata, Paulina Manduch
We organise drop-in sessions and networking events, which provide a platform for meeting other organisers, exchanging ideas, and asking questions related to ReproducibiliTea journal club organization.
Internal communications and collaborations
Our team keeps the community updated via Slack and mailing lists, but recently we have worked to strengthen the collaborations between ReproducibiliTea clubs via three avenues:
Post-publication review project - Team: Paulina Manduch, Lianne Wolsink
This project is aimed at encouraging journal clubs to engage in post-publication reviewing and commenting (see our blog post & a new section on our website).
In October 2025, we organised two webinars on the topic of peer review and its diversification (see full programme). The video recordings are available on our YouTube channel.
In our recent blog post series, ReproducibiliTea organisers have shared their insights and experiences with post-publication reviewing blog post 1 |
blog post 2 |
blog post 3.
Paper with tips for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club - Team: Lianne Wolsink, Abigail Licata, Paulina Manduch, Sophia Crüwell, Anastasiia Marmyleva, Hemani Sharma, Michael Muhoozi, William Ngiam, Helena Gellersen, Matt Jaquiery, Jan Vornhagen, Hazel Aileen van der Walle
We are finalising a manuscript focused on tips for running a ReproducibiliTea journal club, which will act as a guide for both the set-up and transferral of journal clubs as members leave their institution.
Outreach and external relations - Team: Helena Gellersen, Hazel Aileen van der Walle, Paulina Manduch, Lianne Wolsink
In collaboration with the Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training (FORRT) we worked on a paper on citational politics in academia. We reflect on current biases and their causes and provide readers with a toolkit to empower them to assess their own citation practices. This work is integrated with FORRT’s Academic Wheel of Privilege (AWoP), a concerted effort to make academia more open to people from all backgrounds. Preprint - In Pursuit of Citational Justice: A Toolkit for Equitable Scholarship | Video.
In June 2025, Hazel Aileen van der Walle gave a presentation on ReproducibiliTea and our current projects at the UKRN Local Network Leads retreat in London.
Final remarks
At the end of 2025, we will have two members, Helena Gellersen and Paulina Manduch, step down from the steering committee to join the advisory board.
We are now forming a new steering committee for 2026. We are grateful for all the steering committee applications sent to us!
]]>However, while engaging in this practice can be quite daunting, I have found that most learning for academics can come from seeing how experts in the field openly and publicly debate existing, peer-reviewed, and published work. I’ve seen papers be completely dismantled due to poor statistical methodologies employed, incorrect interpretation of the results, or simply theoretical issues that would invalidate the central premise of said paper. Often, these come in the form of social media interactions, blog posts, or pub peer comments. But all are valuable. They remind us that science does not end with peer review; that is simply the first level of scrutiny that a piece of work must pass.
About the author:
Mircea Zloteanu | @mzloteanu | @mzloteanu.bsky.social | King’s College London
Post-publication peer-review is the need of the hour which ensures we honor COPE guidelines besides ensuring reproducibility and the articles’ transparency. Peer-review is in the eye of the beholder and it may be possible that the post peer review could allow other researchers, including those authors of the published article take measures on improvement, ‘sci’tability and check scientific quotient.
About the authors:
Prashanth N Suravajhala (@prashbio | Linkedin), Professor, Systems Genomics Lab, Manipal University Jaipur and Founder, Bioclues.org |
@bioclues
Hemani Sharma (PhD), Joint Secretary, Bioclues.org |
@bioclues
Post-publication review of reproducibility best practices & data visualisation (video recording)
Slides from this presentation [link]
Blog of the Babraham ReproducibiliTea journal club [link]
About the author:
Richard J. Acton | @RichardJActon@fosstodon.org | Babraham Institute
Along with publishing preprints, making our work globally accessible on a faster timescale, post-publication reviewing seemed like a great step to engage with in the publish-review-curate model. This model summarises a method of research dissemination where preprinted or open work is reviewed publicly by people with relevant insight, and validated in context by others to improve discoverability and trust. With support from ASAPbio’s preprint review club program to share snacks with attendees while we discussed papers, we set about using some of our ReproducibiliTea meetings to review preprints together on a regular basis. When we did some research for guidance on reviewing, we realised that it was very common to have minimal help when starting out. ASAPbio’s resources on the FAST principles for preprint feedback formed the backbone of our approach; mainly, that reviews should be focused, appropriate, specific, and transparent. Focusing on being reflective and specific, we aimed to provide clear, actionable, and useful suggestions for the authors.
There were understandable concerns about being open in critiques of research. In particular, as early career researchers there were specific worries about being judged negatively for engaging in public criticism or leaving inexpert feedback. Making it optional for journal club attendees to sign the reviews and acknowledging our expertise candidly made it a more accessible process. The important thing for us was to have peer-to-peer feedback during the process, which helped to shape the tone and clarity of our comments to better contextualise the research findings. We also discussed the ways that open review may give readers of the feedback the impression that reviewed work is less robust than preprints without public feedback, but agreed that a collegial and engaged review remains an optional, useful contribution to authors and colleagues, should they choose to read it.
The process has given us an opportunity to talk about why open reviews can be a positive contribution to journal clubs and the research community. Reviewing preprints openly provides an alternative way of engaging with research in the public domain, beyond journals that allow for hosted post-publication critiques, such as letters to the editor or validation reports. There are often specific restrictions to these forms of feedback. They also may not be linked directly to the original article, or published at all. By using the PREreview platform, we have a DOI for each review and location linked to preprint servers on which to share our feedback freely. Open reviews, credited to reviewers, may be a more incentivising practice than closed reviewing for for-profit journal entities, and could motivate the understanding that reviews are pieces of scholarly work in and of themselves.
We have now completed several reviews, and it’s been empowering to think together about how to convey positive, constructive feedback in an open way. Taking preprints seriously as a valuable dissemination practice has fostered discussions about their value as a more equitable, self-determined approach to sharing research than through traditional routes. Hopefully, we have also contributed useful insights to the preprints we have reviewed! We now review preprints on a regular basis, and look forward to continuing in our ReproducibiliTea meetings into the future.
About the author: Ze Freeman | @zefreeman.bsky.social | King’s College London ReproducibiliTea
]]>Therefore, ReproducibiliTea and the UK Reproducibility Network (UKRN) decided to collaborate on a new project: Post-publication reviews by ReproducibiliTea journal clubs. Importantly, this project is not about finding errors in other researchers’ work, but rather about conducting constructive critical reviews, including highlighting the positive aspects of articles. With this project we aim to contribute to peer review training for early career researchers, stimulate critical thinking and discussion, encourage the sharing of results of the journal club discussions, and encourage early career researchers to contribute to scholarly discussions. Moreover, we also hope to foster a constructive and engaged post-publication culture and to make post-publication reviewing common practice. The journal clubs are free to decide whether and how to implement this project in their journal clubs: which article to review, how to conduct the review, how to write a commentary, if and where to publish. The steering committee provides resources to make it as easy as possible to start: a list with suggested review targets, peer review guidelines and recommendations, as well as a list of venues where commentaries could be published and a list of funding opportunities.
Because this project is still in its pilot phase (start January 2025), these documents are not publicly available yet. Interested in participating in the project? Send us an email: reproducibilitea@gmail.com and we will send you more information including resources.
We believe this project is also a good opportunity to raise understanding of the current peer review system. Therefore, in October 2025, we organised two webinars on the topic of peer review and its diversification (more info). The video recordings are available on our YouTube channel.
We encourage journal clubs to discuss these topics further at their meetings. There are many thought-provoking readings on: peer review and its shortcomings (e.g., Byrne & Barnett, 2024; Cooke et al., 2024; Huber et al., 2022), self-correcting mechanisms in science (e.g., Hardwicke et al., 2022; Vazire & Holcombe, 2022) or on ideas to improve the peer review system: e.g., structured peer review (Malički, 2024), open continuous peer review (Nosek & Bar-Anan, 2012), diversifying peer review (Alves, 2025; Munafò et al., 2017), preprint review (Avissar-Whiting et al., 2024) and post-publication review (Barbour & Stell, 2020; O’Sullivan et al., 2021). Last but not least, we think it is vital to consider the topics of scholarly publishing (e.g., Casadevall et al., 2024), research quality (e.g., Langfeldt et al., 2020), and research assessment (e.g., Trueblood et al., 2025).
You can visit our app or OSF folder to explore related reading lists e.g., a reading list on peer review created by Mario Malički. Additional reading lists will be available soon.
Acknowledgments: We are very grateful for the ongoing feedback from the ReproducibiliTea community that helps us shape and improve this project. We would like to thank Marcus Munafò for his support.
References
Please join us in welcoming our new committee members:
Abigail Licata @licataae.bsky.social
Abigail is a PhD student in Neuroscience at the University of Geneva (Switzerland) and is a part of the Swiss Reproducibility Network. She has co-organized the ReproducibiliTea journal clubs since 2023 and has been involved with reproducibility-focused events including BrainHack and a workshop on reproducible analysis with R Quarto. Prior to her PhD, she worked in clinics in the US and Germany, assisting professionals of different backgrounds with neuroimaging analysis in various patient populations. Beyond her passion for reproducible neuroimaging, she also helps connect women in neuroscience across the globe as a member and event co-organizer for the Women in Neuroscience Repository. She believes in science as a collaborative effort for the benefit of humanity and hopes to spread FAIR neuroimaging methods far and wide!
Anastasiia Marmyleva @marmyleva_ana / @marmyleva-ana.bsky.social / (LinkedIn)
Anastasiia is an avid mitochondria enthusiast, which drove her to pursue a Doctoral degree at the University of Helsinki, Finland. She is also a co-organiser of a ReproducibiliTea UniHelsinki club - a safe space for researchers to address the issues of reproducibility in science and educate each other on good practices. Anastasiia is also passionate about science communication and is not afraid to use these tools to fight against miscommunication in research.
Hemani Sharma (LinkedIn)
Hemani is a dedicated professional in the field of Bioinformatics. She is currently pursuing Ph.D. in Bioinformatics from Jaipur National University and also serves as Joint Secretary at Bioclues. She is adept at crafting scientific papers for academic journals and writes the BIOCLUES newsletter, organizes the Journal Club talks, and coordinates conferences and workshops to ensure productive outcomes, fostering collaborative scientific discussions. Dr Prashanth founded Bioclues.org virtually in 2005 with support from some of his friends and colleagues. “With several core members and mentors, it is now India’s largest bioinformatics society working for mentor-mentee relationships through Mentoring-Outreach-Research-Entrepreneurship (MORE) verticals”. In the year 2010, they have set up vision 2020 to ensure their thoughts are converted to actions by the said year. As they set the milestones, they heralded vision 2030. Hemani also worked as a Junior Research Fellow at the Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley (2011-2013) under the guidance of Dr. Ravish Chatrath and Dr. Rekha Malik. Noteworthy research projects include hierarchical clustering of Indian wheat varieties, evaluation of agro-morphological characters for genetic diversity, and establishing a core set of Indian wheat.
Hazel Aileen van der Walle @hazelvanderwalle.bsky.social
Hazel is a PhD student in Music Psychology at Durham University (UK), where she set up and co-organises Durham’s ReproducibiliTea journal club. Having earned her MSc in Music Psychology & Neuroscience and BA in Theology & Music, she brings a keen interdisciplinary focus to the ReproducibiliTea team, aiming to connect the sciences with the arts and humanities in diverse Open Research practices and methodologies.
And, our new committee co-chairs:
Helena Gellersen
Helena received her PhD in psychology from the University of Cambridge where she was also a co-organiser of the ReproducibiliTea journal club. She is now a postdoc at the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases and a Research Fellow at St John’s College Cambridge. She is also a guest lecturer for the Improving Scientific Practises research master course at Cambridge.
Paulina Manduch (LinkedIn)
Paulina studied at SGH Warsaw School of Economics and SWPS University in Warsaw, Poland. In November 2024, she defended her Master’s thesis in experimental psychology of creativity. She contributed to many ReproducibiliTea meetings at SWPS University, both as a presenter and as a co-organiser. Paulina has been serving on the steering committee since early 2023, and is eager to develop and implement projects to support journal clubs.
And, give a warm ‘welcome back’ to our returning members:
Michael Muhoozi @MUHOOZIMICHAEL
Michael is a PhD student in Healthcare Policy and Research at Virginia Commonwealth University and a researcher at the Center for Health and Population Research, Makerere University, Uganda. Passionate about ensuring that decision-making and policy are grounded in reproducible, transparent, and replicable evidence, Michael led the establishment of ReproducibiliTea at Makerere University to foster a culture of research reproducibility. His work emphasizes the importance of rigorous and accessible research practices in healthcare policy, particularly in underrepresented and resource-limited settings.
Lianne Wolsink @liannewolsink.bsky.social
Lianne is a PhD student at the Department of Cognitive Psychology at Ruhr University Bochum, Germany. She is originally from the Netherlands, where she studied Psychology and Neuroscience in Nijmegen and Maastricht. Lianne started and co-organises the ReproducibiliTea in Bochum.
We have a lot of exciting projects and we are always looking for ideas. If you want to get involved, have a cool idea you think we could tackle, or have some critique for us, please get in touch.
]]>So without further ado,
Please join us in welcoming our new committee members:
Michael Muhoozi @MUHOOZIMICHAEL
Michael is a researcher at Makerere University, Center for Health and Population Research, Uganda. He has experience starting and organizing ReproducibiliTea in Makerere University, Uganda. Michael is keen to promote research reproducibility, particularly within the realm of healthcare policy.
Lianne Wolsink @liannewolsink.bsky.social
Lianne is a PhD student at the Department of Cognitive Psychology at Ruhr University Bochum, Germany. She is originally from the Netherlands, where she studied Psychology and Neuroscience in Nijmegen and Maastricht. Lianne started and co-organises the ReproducibiliTea in Bochum.
And, our new committee chair:
Sophia Crüwell @cruwelli.bsky.social
Sophia is a PhD student in Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge, working on conceptual issues surrounding the replication crisis; she has also worked on empirical metaresearch projects. Sophia started the original ReproducibiliTea journal club at Oxford (with Sam Parsons & Amy Orben), as well as those at Amsterdam (with Angelika Stefan & Florian Wanders), and Berlin (with Corinna Hartling).
And, give a warm ‘welcome back’ to our returning members:
Helena Gellersen
Helena received her PhD in psychology from the University of Cambridge where she was also a co-organiser of the ReproducibiliTea journal club. She is now a postdoc at the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases. She is also a Research Fellow-elect at St John’s College Cambridge.
Matt Jaquiery @MJaquiery
Matt is a Research Software Engineer at the University of Oxford. He completed a DPhil in Experimental Psychology in January 2023. Matt manged the Oxford Experimental Psychology ReproducibiliTea while a DPhil student there, and has contributed to various open science projects with the UKRN, FORRT, and other organisations. He does a bunch of the technical stuff for the core ReproducibiliTea organisation.
Paulina Manduch (on LinkedIn)
Paulina is a psychology student at the SWPS University in Warsaw, Poland, working on her master’s thesis on creativity and memory. Paulina is the chair of the Open Science Society at her university and she co-organises online ReproducibiliTea meetings in the Polish language.
William Ngiam @willngiam.bsky.social
William is currently a postdoc in the Department of Psychology at the University of Chicago, where he started and co-organizes the ReproducibiliTea journal club! He will soon be a Lecturer at the University of Adelaide, where he hopes to help early-career researchers from community with a new ReproducibiliTea journal club.
We have a lot of exciting projects and we are always looking for ideas. If you want to get involved, have a cool idea you think we could tackle, or have some critique for us, please get in touch.
]]>So without further ado:
Please join us in welcoming our new committee members:
Helena Gellersen
Helena received her PhD in psychology from the University of Cambridge where she was also a co-organiser of the ReproducibiliTea journal club. She is now a postdoc at the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases.
Paulina Manduch (on LinkedIn)
Paulina is a psychology student at the SWPS University in Warsaw, Poland, working on her master’s thesis on creativity and memory. Paulina is the chair of the Open Science Society at her university and she co-organises online ReproducibiliTea meetings in the Polish language.
And, our new committee chair:
Jan Vornhagen @VornhagenJB@hci.social
Jan will follow Sam as the chair of the steering committee for 2023.
Jan is a cognitive Psychologist and PhD fellow at the IT university Copenhagen, Denmark. He joined the ReproducibiliTea Steering Committee in 2021.
And, give a warm ‘welcome back’ to our returning members:
Sophia Crüwell @cruwelli
Sophia is a PhD student in Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge, working on conceptual issues of the replication crisis and also working on empirical metaresearch projects with the QUEST Center in Berlin. Sophia started the ReproducibiliTea journal clubs at Oxford (with Sam & Amy), Amsterdam (with Angelika Stefan & Florian Wanders), and Berlin (with Corinna Hartling).
Matt Jaquiery @MJaquiery
Matt is a Research Software Engineer at the University of Oxford. He completed a DPhil in Experimental Psychology in January 2023. Matt manged the Oxford Experimental Psychology ReproducibiliTea while a DPhil student there, and has contributed to various open science projects with the UKRN, FORRT, and other organisations. He does a bunch of the technical stuff for the core ReproducibiliTea organisation.
William Ngiam @will_ngiam
William is a postdoc in the Department of Psychology at the University of Chicago, where he started and co-organizes the ReproducibiliTea journal club!
Sam Parsons @sam_d_parsons
Sam is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour. He started ReproducibiliTea with Sophia and Amy, and also founded the Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training (FORRT) project.
We have a lot of exciting things planned for next year.
Like last year, we will also reflect on our recruiting process. We will add that soon. In the mean time, we are always looking for ideas. If you yourself want to get involved, have a cool idea you think we could tackle, or have some critique for us, please get in touch
In conclusion: A new year, a new steering committee and a lot of things to do.
We are looking forward to it.
]]>
