Duration and Quality of the Peer Review Process: The Author's Perspective
Duration and Quality of the Peer Review Process: The Author's Perspective
An analysis of data from 3500 review experiences submitted by authors to the SciRev.sc website.
publications
Send us a link
An analysis of data from 3500 review experiences submitted by authors to the SciRev.sc website.
The efficacy and ethics of piracy, placing ‘guerrilla open access’ within a longer history of piracy and access to knowledge.
Academics often complain about how long it takes for a paper to undergo peer reveiw. A publication reveals several striking observations based on these experiences.
A new study has found that funding agencies are not as open as they could be about what they are doing to prevent this waste and that governments responsible for the public money they distribute are not holding them to account.
Gender Report — Analysis of research performance through a gender lens across 20 years, 12 geographies, and 27 subject areas.
Prior co-authorship relations have a large and significant influence on manuscript handling times, speeding up the editorial decision on average by 19 days.
The number of backers a product attracts during crowdfunding predicts its financial success in the marketplace – not the amount of money raised.
Environmental scientists and policymakers value long-term research to an extent that far outstrips the amount of funding awarded for it.
Report unveiled at union’s congress highlights ‘unreasonable, unsafe and excessive hours’. Get the report at www.ucu.org.uk/workload
Report highlighting the need for a reference database of research organisations.
It often feels as though today’s health headlines are some scientific version of Mad Libs. And now there’s a study that provides evidence for that hunch.
How centralization of journals led to the serials crisis and why democratizing digital journal publishing using services is the key to fixing it.
A new study suggests that, contrary to common fears, the answer is no.
It is often assumed that issue advocacy will compromise the credibility of scientists.
How to take into account differences in standards, confidence and bias in assessment panels.
New discoveries about the human mind show the limitations of reason.
Llow replication success in psychology is realistic and worse performance may be expected for cognitive neuroscience.
A law that aimed to stimulate the creation of spin-offs hasn't had much effect.
The establishment of university-affiliated incubators is often followed by a reduction in the quality of university innovations.
Landscape Analysis of Mechanisms Around the World Engaging Scientists and Engineers in Policy.
A plan setting out what the Dutch are already doing and what they plan to do to grasp the opportunities and at the same time make science even more accessible to others.
While we need to alert researchers to the presence of predatory journals, we should mostly put our efforts into transforming the academic research environment and reward systems, raising standards and developing true collegiality both within and between institutions.
At a time when funding and international reputation are based predominantly on research activities, universities are shining a new light on their important role as education institutions.
The growth of open access hasn't significantly changed the publishing landscape as regards impact factor.
An overview of the new rules to consider where scientific projects include the processing of personal data.
Universities are facing a crisis of relevance. While there are multiple reasons for this to be happening, one that deserves particular attention is the extent to which academic scholars do not see it as their role to engage in public and political discourse. However, increased engagement is unavoidable in an emerging educational context where the calibre of public discourse has become so degraded and social media is changing the nature of science and scientific discourse within society.