Raising the Status of Peer Review With Publons
An interview with Tom Culley, Marketing Director of Publons, on how provide recognition for this vital part of the scientific process.
An interview with Tom Culley, Marketing Director of Publons, on how provide recognition for this vital part of the scientific process.
New contract gives researchers access to Wiley's journals and makes their papers open access
In this Special Communication, President Barack Obama reviews the Affordable Care Act: why he pursued it, what it has effected, and how the health care system can still be improved.
A surprising number of physicists and astronomers and STEM professionals compete in long, hard, miserable athletic endeavors like ultramarathons. Why?
Funding doctoral training can be a driving force for innovation, especially if it involves industry, according to a new European Commission study.
These are dark times for science so we asked hundreds of researchers how to fix it.
Elsevier's role in the EU's Open Science Monitor is examined more closely.
Many research projects draw on sources of funding from the corporate world. Fola Adeleke discusses the challenges inherent to this kind of research and outlines three key considerations for researchers engaging with corporate partners.
More than 1 million studies are now downloaded from the site every month, mostly in neuroscience, bioinformatics and genomics.
Review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes significantly affect how faculty direct their own career and scholarly progression. Although RPT practices vary between and within institutions, and affect various disciplines, ranks, institution types, genders, and ethnicity in different ways, some consistent themes emerge when investigating what faculty would like to change about RPT. For instance, over the last few decades, RPT processes have generally increased the value placed on research, at the expense of teaching and service, which often results in an incongruity between how faculty actually spend their time vs. what is considered in their evaluation. Another issue relates to publication practices: most agree RPT requirements should encourage peer-reviewed works of high quality, but in practice, the value of publications is often assessed using shortcuts such as the prestige of the publication venue, rather than on the quality and rigor of peer review of each individual item.
Scientific awards, medals and prizes awarded by the Royal Society in 2016.
After lengthy negotiations, the EU and Canada reached agreement for Canadian researchers to join Horizon Europe research programme from next year.
When PLoS announced its data policy that all data should be made publicly available, everyone applauded. It was a big step toward an open science and data sharing.
Further to my other post earlier this week, I have added the additional points to my response letter to the Plan S implementation guidelines. These centre around monographs (9), REF involvement in Plan S (10), infrastructural support (11), the "time of publication" (12), clarification of the term "quality" (13), compliance of existing software with repository requirements (14), publisher deposition (15), and the ability to pursue defamation suits for wrongful attribution and reputational damage with the waiver of moral rights under CC BY 4.0 (16). If number 16 could be resolved, the open licensing landscape would be much clearer. The full letter is now available.
You can restore credibility to Congress and lead on issues from opioid addiction to clean water
Academics like keeping definition narrow but worry about tighter deadlines and more record-keeping.
The European Research Council has begun to evaluate the impact of its grants; others should do the same.
According to the SNSF, 40% of scientific publications produced with the support of public funding are openly accessible, which makes Switzerland “progressive” compared with other countries.
The solutions adopted by the high-energy physics community to foster reproducible research are examples of best practices that could be embraced more widely. This first experience suggests that reproducibility requires going beyond openness.
More than 10,000 visual works for academic papers across assorted fields over the past four years have made their way to the world's top academic journals.
For centuries people have been asking, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” Science has not been able to give us an answer so far. We still have to live with the basic statement that “Everything that is is, and it is as long as it keeps its identity, that is, its onticity”, which we may call the “Strong Ontic Principle”.