💬 “It felt more like a collaboration than an exam.”
Victor, Alexandra & Katerina share what it was like publishing their work through eLife’s PRC model, and how it helped them focus on what was possible rather than what was out of reach. #AcademicChatter #OpenScience #ScolComm #SciencePublishing
https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/eba5f10f/publishing-with-elife-more-a-process-of-a-collaboration-than-an-exam-you-need-to-pass?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic
...and with that, the editor, who is an active scientist, has also read and analysed the paper, and makes his job of gathering the reviewers points and telling us what he recommends in terms of changes.
Related: This journal is still the property of a learned society, although it's managed by a for-profit publishing company (one which is historically not altogether innocent of the flaws of our #sciencePublishing system)
2/2
Periodic reminder: spend some time coming up with a generic figure template that shows sizes of commonly used items, eg, label sizes, expected sizes of bands on gels, micrographs and scale bars, fonts, also handy to include common overall sizes.
This figure template is based on MBOC guidelines a few years back.
I've also added the molecular weights of the ladder we commonly use for western blots.
Devinez ce que les scientifiques ont découvert sur les effets de la méditation ! 😉
https://mindflex.fr/science-about-meditation/
#science #sciencenews #scienceouverte #sciencefun #sciencepublishing #meditation #mindfullness #pleineconscience
#Scientists take exploitative commercial #AcademicPublishers to court. All power to them! Hope the lawsuit helps shake this system, get societies to ditch these publishers, and move to fully diamond #OpenAccess journals. #OpenScience #Science #SciencePublishing
https://www.statnews.com/2025/03/10/peer-review-antitrust-lawsuit-academic-scientific-journals-sued-by-scientists/
@jeroenbosman @brembs @HeidiSeibold @aeryn_thrace
Fuck you, #sciencedirect! You know what you did.
#science #publishing #sciencepublishing #wasteoftime #paywalls suck, even when you pay!
This paper investigates how competition to publish first and thereby establish priority impacts the quality of scientific research. We begin by developing a model where scientists decide whether and how long to work on a given project. When deciding how long they should let their projects mature, scientists trade off the marginal benefit of higher quality research against the marginal risk of being preempted. Projects with the highest scientific potential are the most competitive because they induce the most entry. Therefore, the model predicts these projects are also the most rushed and lowest quality.https://academic.oup.com/qje/advance-article/doi/10.1093/qje/qjaf010/7997678
I've been through this "consultation" sequence several times. In my experience, it is useless and a waste. Particularly since the whole point of #eLife is post-publication review (the paper is already out in a preprint by definition using the eLife system).
For post-publication peer-review, there is no issue about being slow. Slow is fine. The paper is already available.
Since the authors decide when the paper is "in its final form", there is no issue about suggestions for extra work.
#eLife needs to stand by their decision to do post-publication peer review. They are not a "gate-keeping journal". That's fine. (It's actually good for the role they are playing.)
Yes, very much so. --- Finding the right balance between citing everything and readability is tricky. For my two (semi)-popular books (Mind Within the Brain [Oxford], Changing How We Choose [MIT Press]), I was able to convince them to let me use a double-step citation process.
What I did was to provide either rare notes through the text (Oxford ~ 1-2 superscript numbers per paragraph) or page number links (MIT Press) that then included author-year citations in the endnote, linking to a full bibliography at the end. So there weren't a lot of notes in the main text, but all of the cites were still there. On the other hand, in order to find the citation, you have to take two steps (to the endnotes and then to the bibliography).
This worked well, but required me to do the major (semi-final) write of the book in LaTeX because I needed to actually program the citation manager myself. (Easy to do in BibTex, really hard in modern systems.)
It was also a major negotiation in both cases that required me standing up for citation and readability.
May be useful for other people writing #books . #SciencePublishing
Today's total time loss to academic/scientific paywalls:
~ 1 hour.
#science #academia #sciencepublishing #paywall #paywalls #openaccesspublishing #OpenAccess #research #lablife
In many ways this is a wasted opportunity and also a colossal loss of funds that could have been put to support far better models of #sciencepublishing #openresearch #DiamondOpenAccessPublishing cut APC costs and wean people away from commercial scientific publishers...
#openscience
#India takes out giant nationwide subscription to 13,000 journals | Science | AAAS https://www.science.org/content/article/india-takes-out-giant-nationwide-subscription-13-000-journals
The #Indian government's One Nation One Subscription #ONOS plan fails to address the problems of scholarly publishing and represents a half-baked plan at best. Also does nothing to get rid of the evils of commercial #sciencepublishing. Edit in The Hindu:
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/onos-bitten-on-indias-one-nation-one-subscription-plan/article68927477.ece
NISO Publishes Update (1.4) to the Journal Article Tag Suite (JATS) Standard
https://niso.org/press-releases/niso-publishes-update-journal-article-tag-suite-jats-standard-14
#standards #ScholarlyPublishing #SciencePublishing
Woo hoo!!
AJEV, the American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, will move to Open Access in 2025!!
As a #MedicalEditor helping #physician-#researchers refine their writing so #MedicalJournals will want to #publish their #articles, I'm frustrated by how people mess with #science. @RetractionWatch reports on ways #SciencePublishing is now fudging the truth: tinyurl.com/y8mpaanb #AmEditing
This is like using ChatGPT to simulate a calculator that gets wrong answers — they used stupendous computational resources to imitate a game that ran on a 386 in 1993, for three seconds.From https://pivot-to-ai.com/2024/09/07/googles-gamengen-ai-doom-video-game-generator-dissecting-a-rigged-demo/
#PeerReview doesn't work well. What to do? Experimental psychologist Adam Mastroianni will make you think: "The Rise and Fall of Peer Review," at https://tinyurl.com/43ztuue3, & "Good Ideas Don't Need Bayonets," at https://tinyurl.com/mprms5v6 . #AmEditing #SciencePublishing #MedicalPublishing
So with 95 responses, the overwhelming response is that only one peer reviewed journal is allowed. But it's about 50/50 saying whether you can do multiple preprint servers.
(For completeness, 8% said multiple journals OK, and 1% said preprint or journal, not both).
