Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
79,613
result(s) for
"Science publishing."
Sort by:
A century of science publishing
Leading publishers and observers of the science publishing scene comment in essay form on key developments over the past century. The scale of the global research effort and its industrial organisation have resulted in substantial increases in the published volume, as well as new techniques for its handling. The former languages of science communication, like Latin and German, have given way to English. The domination of European science before WWII has been followed by large efforts in North America and the Far East. The roots of the National Library of Medicine lie in the US Army medical library, the US War effort gave rise to hypertext, and the US defense reaction to the Soviet Sputnik resulted in the Internet. The European invention of the Web has also changed the science publishing scene in the past five years. Some characteristic publishing enterprises, commercial and society owned, are described in a series of articles. These are followed by analysis of recent developments and possible changes to come. Functions of publishers, librarians and agents are brought into context. The future of publishing is currently being debated on open channels, while the historical dimension and professional input are sometimes lacking.
eBook
Reform retractions to make them more transparent
The scientific community should agree on the essential information to be provided when pulling a paper from the scientific literature.
The scientific community should agree on the essential information to be provided when pulling a paper from the scientific literature.
\"Retractions are not intrinsically bad: they are a practical way to correct for human fallibility.\"
Journal Article
Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency
Beginning January 2014, Psychological Science gave authors the opportunity to signal open data and materials if they qualified for badges that accompanied published articles. Before badges, less than 3% of Psychological Science articles reported open data. After badges, 23% reported open data, with an accelerating trend; 39% reported open data in the first half of 2015, an increase of more than an order of magnitude from baseline. There was no change over time in the low rates of data sharing among comparison journals. Moreover, reporting openness does not guarantee openness. When badges were earned, reportedly available data were more likely to be actually available, correct, usable, and complete than when badges were not earned. Open materials also increased to a weaker degree, and there was more variability among comparison journals. Badges are simple, effective signals to promote open practices and improve preservation of data and materials by using independent repositories.
Journal Article
Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond
The movement towards open science is a consequence of seemingly pervasive failures to replicate previous research. This transition comes with great benefits but also significant challenges that are likely to affect those who carry out the research, usually early career researchers (ECRs). Here, we describe key benefits, including reputational gains, increased chances of publication, and a broader increase in the reliability of research. The increased chances of publication are supported by exploratory analyses indicating null findings are substantially more likely to be published via open registered reports in comparison to more conventional methods. These benefits are balanced by challenges that we have encountered and that involve increased costs in terms of flexibility, time, and issues with the current incentive structure, all of which seem to affect ECRs acutely. Although there are major obstacles to the early adoption of open science, overall open science practices should benefit both the ECR and improve the quality of research. We review 3 benefits and 3 challenges and provide suggestions from the perspective of ECRs for moving towards open science practices, which we believe scientists and institutions at all levels would do well to consider.
Journal Article