Do you blog about Peer Reviewed Research?

[S.A.M.]

If you do, here is something you might be interested in.

A group of science bloggers as released the code for icons that mark blog posts as thoughtful posts on peer reviewed research. These are useful for identifying the scientific content of blog posts in the vast plethora of opinions circulating the net.

The Research Blogging Icons:

The code for blogs has been conveniently included here:
http://bpr3.org/?page_id=56

Guidelines for using them:

1. The "Blogging on Peer-Reviewed Research" icons are to be used solely to denote individual blog posts about peer-reviewed research.
2. While there is no hard-and-fast definition of "peer-review," peer reviewed research should meet the following guidelines:
* Reviewed by experts in field
* Edited
* Archived
* Published with clearly stated publication standards
* Viewed as trustworthy by experts in field
3. The post should offer a complete formal citation of the work(s) being discussed.
4. The post author should have read and understood the entire work cited.
5. The blog post should report accurately and thoughtfully on the research it presents.
6. Where possible, the post should link to the original source and / or provide a DOI or other universal reference number.
7. The post should contain original work by the post author -- while some quoting of others is acceptable, the majority of the post should be the author's own work.
8. Users and readers may report potential abuse of the icons by emailing the site administrator, Dave Munger (remove dashes). Reported abuses may be brought to the attention of readers and discussed publicly online.
9. Repeated abuse of the icons will result in removal from our aggregation system.

http://bpr3.org//?p=53

Who is using them.

http://bpr3.org/?p=52