[REVIEW]: OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid Data #6918

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:26Z

Submitting author: @markheckmann (Mark Heckmann)
Repository: https://github.com/markheckmann/OpenRepGrid
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss
Version: 0.1.16
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @yiqunchen, @rlbarter
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.14262588

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/88b1ba29095623f416d9fe944afe5cd8"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/88b1ba29095623f416d9fe944afe5cd8/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/88b1ba29095623f416d9fe944afe5cd8/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/88b1ba29095623f416d9fe944afe5cd8)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@yiqunchen & @rlbarter, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @arfon know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @rlbarter

📝 Checklist for @yiqunchen

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:28Z

Hello humans, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:43Z

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.01 s (541.3 files/s, 85200.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TeX                              1             28              0            320
Markdown                         1             77              0            155
R                                1             15              9             21
YAML                             1              1              4             18
Rmd                              1             47             80             12
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             5            168             93            526
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    15	Mark Heckmann

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:47Z

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 2439

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:49Z

License info:

🔴 Failed to discover a valid open source license

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:48:55Z

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.03292 is OK
- 10.1017/s1138741600004765 is OK
- 10.3758/bf03195461 is OK
- 10.1080/107205300265955 is OK
- 10.4324/9780203405970 is OK
- 10.1002/9781118508275.ch9 is OK
- 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1982.tb01506.x is OK
- 10.1016/j.appet.2011.05.322 is OK
- 10.1111/papt.12269 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2018.1499159 is OK
- 10.1177/001872674900200205 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2015.1134368 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404940 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.150 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404938 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: shiny: Web Application Framework for R. R package ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GRIDCOR: Correspondence Analysis for Grid Data (ve...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: A manual for repertory grid technique
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Biplots in practice
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The reconstruction of the self in the psychotherap...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Enquire Within II
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Rep 5 Conceptual Representation Software: RepGrid ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Gridstat version 5 - A program for analyzing the d...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Implicative dilemmas and psychological well-being
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GridSuite 4
- No DOI given, and none found for title: vademecum repgrid: Leitfaden zum professionellen E...

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2024-06-22T11:49:40Z

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

arfon · 2024-06-22T11:51:46Z

@yiqunchen, @rlbarter – This is the review thread for the paper. All of our communications will happen here from now on.

Please read the "Reviewer instructions & questions" in the first comment above. Please create your checklist typing:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

As you go over the submission, please check any items that you feel have been satisfied. There are also links to the JOSS reviewer guidelines.

The JOSS review is different from most other journals. Our goal is to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgment on the submission. As such, the reviewers are encouraged to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6918 so that a link is created to this thread (and I can keep an eye on what is happening). Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread. In my experience, it is better to post comments/questions/suggestions as you come across them instead of waiting until you've reviewed the entire package.

We aim for the review process to be completed within about 4-6 weeks but please make a start well ahead of this as JOSS reviews are by their nature iterative and any early feedback you may be able to provide to the author will be very helpful in meeting this schedule.

Noting from the pre-review thread that both reviewers said they would need until the end of July to complete their reviews.

@markheckmann – while we're waiting, could I ask you to fix a couple of things please:

Please make sure there's a license file at the root of your repository with an OSI-approved license.
Could you also try and shorten your paper a bit if possible please? As a guide, we ask that JOSS papers are typically around 1000 words.

Thank you!

markheckmann · 2024-07-20T20:28:38Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot · 2024-07-20T20:29:55Z

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

markheckmann · 2024-07-20T20:39:40Z

@arfon , thanks for moving the review process forward.

The repo now contains a LICENSE.md file with a GPL license as well as a reference to it in the DESCRIPTION file.
I shortened the paper. The word count (exluding references) is now ~1,400. I tried to still keep it informative for readers who may not be familiar with the repertory grid technique. I would be grateful if this length was deemed acceptable.
Package version 0.1.15 was published on CRAN today.

@yiqunchen, @rlbarter: Thanks for agreeing to review this paper.

arfon · 2024-07-26T04:51:21Z

@yiqunchen, @rlbarter – noting that we're close to the end of July here and it doesn't look like you've started your reviews yet. Do you think you might be able to get these done in the next week?

rlbarter · 2024-07-26T15:46:53Z

Yes, I plan to spend some time on this today and early next week.

rlbarter · 2024-07-26T15:48:52Z

Review checklist for @rlbarter

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/markheckmann/OpenRepGrid?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE or COPYING file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@markheckmann) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

rlbarter · 2024-07-30T17:54:39Z

I have concluded my review. The package looks great!

arfon · 2024-08-26T10:37:06Z

Thanks @rlbarter! @yiqunchen – I notice it seems like you've not started your review yet. Do you think you might be able to get in done in the next couple of weeks?

yiqunchen · 2024-09-06T22:17:10Z

Sorry for the delay -- i will plan to get it done in the next couple of days, thank you!

yiqunchen · 2024-09-13T21:00:43Z

Review checklist for @yiqunchen

Conflict of interest

I confirm that I have read the JOSS conflict of interest (COI) policy and that: I have no COIs with reviewing this work or that any perceived COIs have been waived by JOSS for the purpose of this review.

Code of Conduct

I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSS code of conduct.

General checks

Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the https://github.com/markheckmann/OpenRepGrid?
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE or COPYING file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
Contribution and authorship: Has the submitting author (@markheckmann) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?
Substantial scholarly effort: Does this submission meet the scope eligibility described in the JOSS guidelines
Data sharing: If the paper contains original data, data are accessible to the reviewers. If the paper contains no original data, please check this item.
Reproducibility: If the paper contains original results, results are entirely reproducible by reviewers. If the paper contains no original results, please check this item.
Human and animal research: If the paper contains original data research on humans subjects or animals, does it comply with JOSS's human participants research policy and/or animal research policy? If the paper contains no such data, please check this item.

Functionality

Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the functionality of the software can be verified?
Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

Summary: Has a clear description of the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience been provided?
A statement of need: Does the paper have a section titled 'Statement of need' that clearly states what problems the software is designed to solve, who the target audience is, and its relation to other work?
State of the field: Do the authors describe how this software compares to other commonly-used packages?
Quality of writing: Is the paper well written (i.e., it does not require editing for structure, language, or writing quality)?
References: Is the list of references complete, and is everything cited appropriately that should be cited (e.g., papers, datasets, software)? Do references in the text use the proper citation syntax?

yiqunchen · 2024-09-13T22:00:55Z

I have completed my review and the paper looks great! The only request I have for the paper/repo is that it would be great to include an example set of raw input so users could understand the data structure of repertory grid data better. Thank you for a great package and apologies for the dealy on my end again.

JOSS Review: <openjournals/joss-reviews#6918 (comment)>

markheckmann · 2024-09-14T13:56:45Z

HI @yiqunchen , thanks for completing the review and your suggestion.

I included two new sample .txt files in the package (commit). They will be published with the next CRAM release. Two Excel files were already included. The documentation (source on gh-pages branch ) also contains several places where the different file input formats are documented (see below).

Would that suffice for you?

Overview on loading data: https://docs.openrepgrid.org/articles/web/loading.html#loading-openrepgrid-files
Details for each input type (i.e. from the functions docs):
- .txt: https://docs.openrepgrid.org/reference/importTxt.html (will be auto-updated with next CRAN release)
- .xlsx: https://docs.openrepgrid.org/reference/importExcel.html
- ...

samhforbes · 2024-10-20T19:37:26Z

Hi there, just jumping in while @arfon is away. @yiqunchen has this latest response from @markheckmann answered your suggestion?

arfon · 2024-11-11T20:50:29Z

Friendly bump here @yiqunchen.

markheckmann · 2024-11-30T14:30:50Z

Hi, I wanted to kindly ask if it might be possible to expedite the review process and finalize in 2024? I greatly appreciate your time and consideration. Thanks!

editorialbot · 2024-12-02T15:03:10Z

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

markheckmann · 2024-12-02T21:17:38Z

Dear @arfon ,

I proofread the paper again and removed a few typos. It should be fine now.
A new R package version (0.1.16) containing the changes requested by the reviewers was published on CRAN today
The package code was uploaded to Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/14262588 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.14262588

arfon · 2024-12-07T08:38:47Z

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.14262588 as archive

editorialbot · 2024-12-07T08:38:50Z

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.14262588

arfon · 2024-12-07T08:38:55Z

@editorialbot set 0.1.16 as version

editorialbot · 2024-12-07T08:38:57Z

Done! version is now 0.1.16

arfon · 2024-12-07T08:39:06Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2024-12-07T08:39:08Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-12-07T08:41:26Z

👋 @openjournals/sbcs-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉📄 Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#6234, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2024-12-07T08:43:19Z

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.03292 is OK
- 10.1017/s1138741600004765 is OK
- 10.3758/bf03195461 is OK
- 10.1080/107205300265955 is OK
- 10.4324/9780203405970 is OK
- 10.1002/9781118508275.ch9 is OK
- 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1982.tb01506.x is OK
- 10.1016/j.appet.2011.05.322 is OK
- 10.1111/papt.12269 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2018.1499159 is OK
- 10.1177/001872674900200205 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2015.1134368 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404940 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.150 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404938 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: shiny: Web Application Framework for R. R package ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GRIDCOR: Correspondence Analysis for Grid Data (ve...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: A manual for repertory grid technique
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Biplots in practice
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The reconstruction of the self in the psychotherap...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Enquire Within II
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Rep 5 Conceptual Representation Software: RepGrid ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Gridstat version 5 - A program for analyzing the d...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Implicative dilemmas and psychological well-being
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GridSuite 4
- No DOI given, and none found for title: vademecum repgrid: Leitfaden zum professionellen E...

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

arfon · 2024-12-18T21:27:50Z

@markheckmann – I spotted a minor issue with the figure captions. Could you please merge this PR? markheckmann/OpenRepGrid#44

markheckmann · 2024-12-18T22:53:17Z

@arfon , I merged your PR. Thanks!

markheckmann · 2024-12-19T07:57:38Z

@editorialbot generate pdf

arfon · 2024-12-19T11:15:09Z

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:15:12Z

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:15:38Z

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.21105/joss.03292 is OK
- 10.1017/s1138741600004765 is OK
- 10.3758/bf03195461 is OK
- 10.1080/107205300265955 is OK
- 10.4324/9780203405970 is OK
- 10.1002/9781118508275.ch9 is OK
- 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1982.tb01506.x is OK
- 10.1016/j.appet.2011.05.322 is OK
- 10.1111/papt.12269 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2018.1499159 is OK
- 10.1177/001872674900200205 is OK
- 10.1080/10720537.2015.1134368 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404940 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.150 is OK
- 10.1080/08936039208404938 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: shiny: Web Application Framework for R. R package ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GRIDCOR: Correspondence Analysis for Grid Data (ve...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: A manual for repertory grid technique
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Biplots in practice
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The reconstruction of the self in the psychotherap...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Enquire Within II
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The measurement of intrapersonal space by grid tec...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Rep 5 Conceptual Representation Software: RepGrid ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Gridstat version 5 - A program for analyzing the d...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Implicative dilemmas and psychological well-being
- No DOI given, and none found for title: GridSuite 4
- No DOI given, and none found for title: vademecum repgrid: Leitfaden zum professionellen E...

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:17:00Z

👋 @openjournals/sbcs-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof 👉📄 Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#6271, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

arfon · 2024-12-19T11:33:32Z

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:33:36Z

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:41:56Z

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

cff-version: "1.2.0"
authors:
- family-names: Heckmann
  given-names: Mark
  orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0736-7417"
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14262588
message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the
  Journal of Open Source Software.
preferred-citation:
  authors:
  - family-names: Heckmann
    given-names: Mark
    orcid: "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0736-7417"
  date-published: 2024-12-19
  doi: 10.21105/joss.06918
  issn: 2475-9066
  issue: 104
  journal: Journal of Open Source Software
  publisher:
    name: Open Journals
  start: 6918
  title: "OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid
    Data"
  type: article
  url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06918"
  volume: 9
title: "OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid
  Data"

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:42:02Z

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:42:03Z

🦋🦋🦋 👉 Bluesky post for this paper 👈 🦋🦋🦋

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T11:42:04Z

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 Creating pull request for 10.21105.joss.06918 joss-papers#6272
Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06918
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

arfon · 2024-12-19T12:36:36Z

@yiqunchen, @rlbarter – many thanks for your reviews here! JOSS relies upon the volunteer effort of people like you and we simply wouldn't be able to do this without you ✨

@markheckmann – your paper is now accepted and published in JOSS ⚡🚀💥

editorialbot · 2024-12-19T12:36:39Z

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following

code snippets

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06918/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06918)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06918">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06918/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06918/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06918

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/join
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-open-journals

markheckmann · 2024-12-19T12:50:43Z

@arfon, @rlbarter and @yiqunchen. I truly appreciate the effort you and the reviewers put into it. 🙏🙏🙏 Thanks a lot!

I wish all of you a Merry Christmas and a joyful holiday season! 🎅🎄❄️

editorialbot added R review TeX Track: 4 (SBCS) Social, Behavioral, and Cognitive Sciences labels Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot assigned arfon Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot mentioned this issue Jun 22, 2024

[PRE REVIEW]: OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid Data #6182

Closed

rlbarter mentioned this issue Jul 26, 2024

JOSS Review: add community guidelines markheckmann/OpenRepGrid#43

Closed

markheckmann added a commit to markheckmann/OpenRepGrid that referenced this issue Sep 14, 2024

tweak data import docs for JOSS review

c9750e9

JOSS Review: <openjournals/joss-reviews#6918 (comment)>

editorialbot added the recommend-accept Papers recommended for acceptance in JOSS. label Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot added accepted published Papers published in JOSS labels Dec 19, 2024

arfon closed this as completed Dec 19, 2024

[REVIEW]: OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid Data #6918

[REVIEW]: OpenRepGrid: An R Package for the Analysis of Repertory Grid Data #6918

Comments

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Status

Reviewer instructions & questions

Checklists

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024

arfon commented Jun 22, 2024

markheckmann commented Jul 20, 2024

editorialbot commented Jul 20, 2024

markheckmann commented Jul 20, 2024 • edited Loading

arfon commented Jul 26, 2024

rlbarter commented Jul 26, 2024

rlbarter commented Jul 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @rlbarter

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

rlbarter commented Jul 30, 2024

arfon commented Aug 26, 2024

yiqunchen commented Sep 6, 2024

yiqunchen commented Sep 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Review checklist for @yiqunchen

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

yiqunchen commented Sep 13, 2024

markheckmann commented Sep 14, 2024 • edited Loading

samhforbes commented Oct 20, 2024

arfon commented Nov 11, 2024

markheckmann commented Nov 30, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 2, 2024

markheckmann commented Dec 2, 2024

arfon commented Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 7, 2024

arfon commented Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 7, 2024

arfon commented Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 7, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 7, 2024

arfon commented Dec 18, 2024

markheckmann commented Dec 18, 2024 • edited Loading

markheckmann commented Dec 19, 2024

arfon commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

arfon commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

arfon commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Dec 19, 2024

markheckmann commented Dec 19, 2024

editorialbot commented Jun 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

markheckmann commented Jul 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rlbarter commented Jul 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

yiqunchen commented Sep 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

markheckmann commented Sep 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

markheckmann commented Dec 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading