Research Integrity and Reproducibility are Two Aspects of the Same Underlying Issue – A Report from STM Week 2022
Observations on reproducibility and research integrity from London STM Week
Phill is a co-founder with responsibility for digital and technology at MoreBrains Consulting Cooperative, where he acts as a principal consultant for a range of clients in open science infrastructure, scholarly publishing, and digital product innovation. Immediately prior to MoreBrains, Phill was running his own independent consultancy called Double L Digital. He’s a member of the Learned Publishing Editorial Board and volunteers on the SSP annual conference committee and funder task force. He’s also a member of the advisory board for the Researcher to Reader conference.
Previously, Phill was the CTO at Emerald Publishing. Before that, he held a series of roles at Digital Science, including Director of Publishing Innovation and a senior role in the consultancy division. He was also the first Editorial Director at Journal of Visualized Experiments.
In a former life, Phill was a cross-disciplinary researcher at Imperial College, London, UK Atomic Energy Authority, and Harvard Medical school. His career spanned plasma physics, biomedical engineering and neuroscience.
Observations on reproducibility and research integrity from London STM Week
Research bureaucracy and administrative burden has become so overpowering that many researchers are reporting that they don’t have time to do any research anymore. Phill Jones argues that technology in the form of PIDs will go a long way to fixing this.
A recent data falsification scandal in Alzheimer’s research raises new questions about perverse incentives in the culture and practice of science.
In the light of CCCs acquisition of Ringgold last week, three Chefs, Phill Jones, Roger Schonfeld, and Todd Carpenter reflect on the motivations for the move and its implications for PIDs and organisational identifiers.
A report on the SSP Publisher-Funder Task Force’s meeting of senior researchers, university administrators, funders, publishers, and representatives from other organizations on the topic of Responsible Research Assessment for the 21st Century.
Twice a year, members of the Research Data Alliance come together for a plenary meeting that brings together active working groups, interest groups, and communities of practice. Phill Jones virtually attended the 18th plenary from the comfort and (COVID) safety of his home office. These are some of his observations about research infrastructure, data standards and persistent identifiers.
To round off Peer Review Week 2021, Phill Jones and Alice Meadows share work under way to map out a PID-optimized workflow for peer review – and invite your feedback!
In the second of two posts on persistent identifiers in scholarly communications, Phill Jones and Alice Meadows share information about a new cost-benefit analysis showing the value of widespread PID adoption
Today’s post is the first of two in which we look at the state of persistent identifiers and what they mean for publishers—to coincide with the first meeting, on June 21, of the new UK Research Identifier National Coordinating Council (RINCC) and publication the same day of a Cost Benefit Analysis Report, funded by the UK Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) for Open Access project.
Whether or not you attended this year’s 24-hour online party for persistent identifiers, aka PIDapalooza 2021, here’s your chance to read all about it!