2 ms·
It's an irritatingly common requirement for supplementary data submitted to a journal to be in the form of an excel file, so I'd bet a number of those errors we
by _Wintermute 8y ago
It's an irritatingly common requirement for supplementary data submitted to a journal to be in the form of an excel file, so I'd bet a number of those errors were caused by researchers just going through all the hoops required for publishing.
- michaericalribo 8y agoChiming in with the first big name journal I thought of—Nature, which lists Excel as a more appropriate format for supplementary data than a table: https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/supp-info https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/supp-info It doesn’t mean Excel is the right tool, but it does speak to a fundamental problem: it’s a non-starter to try to change the entire scientific community in one move. We need to find ways to make the tools people use do a better job at doing what we want them to, rather than shouting that they’re using the wrong tool...