Why Do We Allow Poor Science to Guide Policy?
Science policy is often guided by poorly-constructed and highly biased survey results. Shouldn’t we demand more?
Publishers! What Are They Good For? Part Deux: The Debate
The participants in the recent SSP session debating the value of publishers reflect on the session, the audience interactions, and their talks. And, of course, the Romans.
The Hitler Meme Hits Peer Review and Having His NIH Grant Application Rejected
Two funny videos of processes in scientific life which many of us can use a good laugh about. Warning — Hitler, unsurprisingly, swears like a sailor when he’s frustrated. The peer review send-up: And, if you want more, there’s the […]
The ALPSP Report on Six-Month Embargo Mandates — STM Journals Die Slowly, Social Science Journals Die Quickly
The ALPSP study of the possible effects of a six-month embargo for journal content shows that humanities and social science journals are more at-risk, but the entire industry could find the precipice if such mandates were to take shape.
Second Course: Liveblogging the 2012 SSP Closing Session
3:30 p.m.: David C. notes that publishers are in an interesting quandary — they’re castigated for making a profit, yet they’re asked to make huge ongoing investments to make information more findable and usable. Publishers need to bring out the […]
Will Editing Mix Machines With Humans? Dan Cohen Ponders the Future of Publishing
The SSP Annual Meeting keynote speaker contemplates how new tools and new ways of presenting content might lead to a world of mixed algorithmic and human editing and curation.
The Risks of Launching a New Services Business — Branding, Cash Flow, and the Fraught Start of PeerJ
PeerJ has the potential to create a divergent path to OA publishing, but its business model isn’t clear. As a service company, there are intangibles it needs to get right in the meantime.
Publishers — What Are They Good For?
Time for your input for a session at the upcoming SSP Annual Meeting — pose your questions now!
ClinicalTrials.gov — Too Many Studies Are Registered Late, Published Late, and Smaller Than Planned
Registering clinical trials after enrollment has commenced may lead to the perception that medical researchers are peeking.
The Open Access Price Wars Have Begun
A new open access publishing service, Peerj, has been started by Peter Binfield, formerly the publisher of PLoS ONE. This augurs a price war among author-pays OA services.
Follow-up on BioMed Central's Sponsored Publication Fees — Granting Funders a View Into Editorial Reports
While BioMed Central’s responses are a mixed bag, a new finding surfaces. And this one might just beat all.
Crossing the Rubicon — Is the UK Going to Enable Open Access for All Taxpayer-Funded Research by 2014?
The UK Government Science Minister articulates a plan for open access and open data for UK research. The implications aren’t clear, but the intentions are.
Reproducibility — An Attempt to Test the Psychology Literature Underscores a Growing Fault Line
The growing perception that science is built on sand demands not only some new incentives, but also an understanding that science is not always easy — or possible — to replicate.
An Interview with Cameron Neylon, PLoS' New Director of Advocacy
An interview about open access, funding of science, publishable works, profit motives, and other topics of interest, with one of the more thoughtful advocates of OA publishing, Cameron Neylon.
Making Mistakes in a Good Direction — The God Complex and Experiments
This fascinating TED talk will resonate on many levels with people who read this blog — study design, arrogance, vindication, creativity, inspiration, complexity, evolution, and authority are all dealt with. The topic is “the God complex” — the tendency for […]