cite references to support our arguments

[Pakillo]

Maybe we should have used references to support our arguments e.g. about perceived barriers for reproducibility (http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970), poor training (e.g. https://peerj.com/articles/285/ & http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002430 & http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.1394/abstract), and loss of data scientists in academia (http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7546-253a).

Maybe we can include them in a further iteration...

[benmarwick]

The editor requested references for this sentence "Some research institutions are already taking measures to ensure that this trend does not slow scientific progress". Here's a few that might be useful:

• http://jakevdp.github.io/blog/2013/10/26/big-data-brain-drain/
• http://blog.fperez.org/2013/11/an-ambitious-experiment-in-data-science.html
• http://www.hcde.washington.edu/files/521/Aragon-521-Au14-Hearts-Minds-Data-Science.pdf

[jakevdp]

I primarily had in mind for this the Moore-Sloan efforts at UW, Berkeley, and NYU, but aside from blog posts like the ones @benmarwick listed, I'm not certain of any citable references to that work.

[Pakillo]

I see. Thanks! I can't find any formal publication either.
I think I'll refer them to the Moore-Sloan website (http://msdse.org/about/). Or, if they want something more 'citable', this article in Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v520/n7546/full/nj7546-253a.html

Cheers