Twitter | Search | |
Ben W. Ansell
Professor of Comparative Democratic Institutions, Nuffield College and University of Oxford, Co-Editor CPS, FBA. School governor.
5,728
Tweets
368
Following
4,040
Followers
Tweets
Ben W. Ansell retweeted
Crystal Palace F.C. 6h
18/19: Manchester United 0-0 Palace Manchester City 2-3 Palace 19/20: Manchester United 1-2 Palace Manchester City 2-2 Palace Manchester is red AND blue.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell retweeted
Wilfried Zaha 8h
Giving up is not an option!! Proud of every single one of the lads today 🙏🏿
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell retweeted
Lawrence McKay 15h
So by 4 to 1, you think it's 'people not places' that's Labour's towns problem. 1 - Lisa Nandy nil. But I want to push back on that a bit: (1/4)
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
Replying to @leonardocarella
It’s Really True!
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
Aren’t you in TX?!
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
The inane Home Office rules about ILR again hitting international academics. A Gates Scholar at Cambridge being denied ILR because she conducted her research on urban India in the actual country of India rather than from a library in Cambridge. Infuriating
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
If the Remain side lose do they get to call for the match to be held again? Ba dum tish 🥁
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
I suppose the good news is normally we are accused of being too slow (because of journal lead times)! Social media, open-access data, replicable code files etc have been great for getting things out but you and are totally right that some caution is warranted.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 17
This week's has a great special report on housing, featuring my work with and important pieces by and many other luminaries. Great work from .
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 16
Replying to @GavinHJackson
Looking forward to the government 'tailoring' service. Could be combined with some bespoke haberdashery
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 15
The American healthcare system is just nuts... and this has nothing to do with paying for innovation etc etc, it's just pointless Kafkaesque bureaucracy mixed with price-gouging.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 15
Replying to @GavinHJackson
Negative partisanship innit?
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 15
Replying to @KerimKavakli
No offence - but that would be crazily difficult to implement! It sounds like a good incentive scheme, until you figure out what an enormous time suck it would be for editors and that you can't possibly credibly commit to it.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell retweeted
EuroPolAPSA Jan 15
Did you publish an outstanding book on European politics in 2019. Submit your book to the APSA EPS best book prize. . Details posted on
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
Replying to @Kunkakom
There is potential here. But it is also the case that not all graduate students are effective reviewers - in particular they are surprisingly harsh compared to typical reviewer. & I think we want people to review after they’ve already published. But u have to learn at some point!
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
Replying to @Kunkakom
Trust me that annoys the hell out of people and just creates even more reviewer burnout.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
I’d be surprised if such a relationship existed but we could certainly look at cps data and see who has to wait longest. But to be honest reviewers often completely misguess who they are reviewing.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
Replying to @ingorohlfing
It is hard though to write ‘this paper is not up to the standard at CPS and we don’t expect it to succeed in external review’. But honestly that’s quite often the reason
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
Not sure if we do to hand, although I think we could compile it.
Reply Retweet Like
Ben W. Ansell Jan 14
Replying to @benwansell
Or we could do what we’ve done at CPS and crank up desk rejects beyond 50% in order to spare our reviewers. That upsets people but we do it blind so it’s pretty fair. It does mean though that editors are exercising a lot of judgment. Hope you trust us... n/n
Reply Retweet Like